Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Shane Keating, Senior Lecturer in Mathematics and Oceanography, UNSW Sydney

Australia’s first ever Olympic curling team scored an historic win but missed the medal podium at the 2022 Winter Olympic Games in Beijing. It was a remarkable performance for a team lacking any dedicated curling facilities at home.

And that’s important, because it is the special properties of curling ice that allow the heavy curling stones to glide and curve in ways that seem to defy physics. In fact, scientists are still not sure what puts the “curl” in curling.

Chess on ice

Curling’s origins date back to 16th-century Scotland, making it one of the world’s oldest team sports. Like golf – invented around the same time in the same part of the world – curling seems both amusingly pointless and deceptively simple to the untrained eye.

It has been called “chess on ice”, although to many Australians it most resembles frozen lawn bowls. Athletes take turns sliding circular 20-kilogram granite stones along the ice toward the centre of a horizontal target 28 metres away. Teams are awarded points for getting their stones closest to the centre of the target, or “house”.

Read more:
Why curling is so gripping to watch

Slippery science

The slippery science behind curling starts with the ice itself. Curling ice must be perfectly flat – far flatter than a typical ice hockey rink – and is sprayed with droplets of water before each game to produce a pebbled surface. This minimises the contact area between the ice and the heavy curling stone.

Curling stones also have a concave lower surface – like the bottom of a beer bottle – that further reduces the contact area between the stone and the ice. The effect is to increase the pressure at the base of the stone, partially melting the ice and reducing friction in a similar way to how ice skates work.

Uniquely among Olympic sports, curling players can change the path of the stone after it has been “thrown”. This is achieved by vigorously sweeping the ice in front of the stone with special brooms that warm the ice and reduce friction, allowing the stone to travel farther and straighter along its path.

Deciding when, where, and how hard to sweep has a big influence on the stone’s trajectory; so naturally it is accompanied by a great deal of enthusiastic yelling.

Give it a spin

By adding a small amount of spin, skilled players can make their stone “curl” along a curving path to block an opponent’s stone or knock it out of the way. Even a small amount of rotation can deflect the path of the curling stone by as much as a metre and a half. How exactly the curling stone does this is something of a puzzle.

Let’s start with a (literal) tabletop experiment. Slide an upturned glass along a table, adding a little spin as it leaves your hand. With a little practice (and perhaps a few replacement glasses) you will be able to make the glass trace a curving path across the table, deflecting to the left when you spin it clockwise or to the right when you spin it anticlockwise.

The reason for this is explained by a branch of science called tribology, which studies the effect of friction on moving and sliding objects.

As the glass spins, it rubs against the table top, generating friction that tries to slow down the rotation of the glass. The friction forces are directed opposite to the direction of motion: for a clockwise-rotating glass, friction will be directed to the left at the front of the glass and to the right at the back of the glass.

When the spinning glass slides across the table, it leans forward slightly in the direction of travel, pushing the front lip of the glass down a little harder on the table than the trailing lip. The extra pressure generates extra friction at the front compared to the back. The resulting imbalance of friction forces causes the glass to deflect in the direction of stronger friction – to the left in the case of a clockwise-rotating glass.

A twist in the tale

But curling stones behave in exactly the opposite way: a clockwise rotation causes the stone to deflect to the right, not the left. For a long time, scientists assumed this was because of an effect called asymmetrical friction.

The theory goes like this: like a glass pushed across a table, a curling stone leans forward slightly. The extra pressure at the front of the stone partially melts the ice at the leading edge, creating a thin film of water that reduces the friction at the front of stone compared with the back.

The curling stone will still deflect in the direction of stronger friction. But in this case, it is the trailing edge that wins, resulting in a deflection to the right rather than the left, for a clockwise-rotating stone.

Scratch that

Like many theories, this explanation was widely accepted until someone got around to actually testing it. In 2012, a team at Uppsala University in Sweden made detailed calculations of the friction forces acting on a sliding stone.

The problem they found is that curling stones rotate quite slowly, only completing a couple of turns before coming to a stop. This spin is far too small to cause a sideways deflection of a metre or more. Even odder, more rotation does not lead to more curl – in fact, spin a stone too hard and it won’t curl at all. Asymmetrical friction cannot explain such behaviour.

The researchers used an electron microscope to look more closely at the ice under a curling stone. They discovered that the front edge of the stone leaves behind miniscule scratches on the ice in the direction of rotation. These scratches act as a guide for the back edge of the stone, causing the stone to deflect in the direction of rotation.

The Swedish team then showed that, using this “scratch-guide” mechanism, they could “steer” the sliding stones by adding artificial scratches to the ice in different directions. In one experiment, a stone was made to travel along a zigzag path by laying down scratches in alternating directions.

Their findings ignited a minor controversy in the admittedly niche world of curling physics.

Competing theories have been proposed, including the pivot-slide model, the evaporation-abrasion model, and the snowplow model.

In 2020, a Japanese team attempted to clear things up by systematically testing each theory in a curling hall using sophisticated motion-tracking equipment, a laser scanning microscope, and some sheets of sandpaper to modify the surface of the curling stone.

However, no clear winner emerged. When it comes to the science of curling, it appears we are just scratching the surface.

Shane Keating does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. The slippery science of Olympic curling: we still don’t know how it works – https://theconversation.com/the-slippery-science-of-olympic-curling-we-still-dont-know-how-it-works-176463

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Josh Roose, Senior Research Fellow, Alfred Deakin Institute, Deakin University

As the 2022 federal election draws nearer, there are many factors that may shape the outcome.

This is not Australia’s first experience of a pandemic, nor the first time this has played a role in state divisions and elections: the 1919 Spanish Influenza pandemic is a case in point.

However, this is the first election in which the immense economic and social damage of a pandemic has combined with a global far-right populist surge, an increase in far-right-wing extremism and the disruptive power of social media. The most recent and visible example is the so-called “Canberra convoy”, which has just concluded.

In seeking to understand the potential influence of these factors, we cannot look at any one of them in isolation; they have to be understood as part of a symbiotic relationship. This is evident when we look at the make-up of the protesters.

They first gathered at old Parliament House, site of the Aboriginal tent embassy, the longest protest for Indigenous rights anywhere in the world. There, the “sovereign citizen” protesters initially sought to cloak themselves in the legitimacy of Aboriginal calls for sovereignty. Shortly after, in December 2021, old Parliament House, which holds significance within some sovereign citizen conspiracy theories, was set on fire. Several people have been charged over the incident.

While featuring a very small number of Indigenous activists, the fire and recently arrived protesters were roundly condemned by Aboriginal leaders at the Tent Embassy.

Since these events, anti-vaccine mandate protesters and other “freedom rally” protesters, including Q-Anon conspiracy theorists, militant wellness groups, religiously inspired actors and far-right extremists such as the Proud Boys, have converged on the nation’s capital. They have protested outside the old and new Parliament House, seeking to cause mass disruption.

Protesters on the ground are highly diverse. Many are keen to paint themselves as concerned “mums and dads”. Others frame their actions as an act of “love”, a pattern seen globally at “freedom” protests.

Indeed, many may be merely exercising their democratic right to protest.

However, it is important to understand that the ideological underpinnings of the freedom movement range from libertarianism to far-right ideologies. We need to move beyond the notion of anti-vaxxers as left-wing hippies from Brunswick or Byron Bay (though they may well be concentrated there).

Many from the “wellness” communities are educated, wealthy, hold strong convictions and are active consumers in a highly profitable enterprise.

Likewise, it is important to move beyond the association of the far right as black-clad, swastika-wearing skinheads (though some may be).

Read more:
‘It’s almost like grooming’: how anti-vaxxers, conspiracy theorists, and the far-right came together over COVID

The modern far right is well organised and more sophisticated in its tactics (including the use of “citizen journalists”, memes and encrypted messaging applications). Most importantly, beyond the traditional neo-Nazi groups, it is multiracial. Restoring the “nation”, rather than race, to an imagined past greatness is central to their extremism.

This is evident in groups such as the Proud Boys, who are present at the Canberra protests, and who were led in the US until recently by Enrique Tarrio, a Cuban American. We have witnessed numerous Ustaše flags at the protests, representing a resurgent Croatian ultranationalist fascist and antisemitic organisation that was active during the second world war, perpetrating acts of genocide. The group also holds a wide variety of groups and individuals from QAnon conspiracy theorists and sovereign citizens (known for their use of the red ensign) to evangelical and Orthodox Christians. They represent a highly multicultural cluster who have opposed the use of vaccines from the earliest days of the pandemic.

Read more:
What is the Australian merchant navy flag, the red ensign? And why do anti-government groups use it?

Importantly, this broad coalition, and the far right in particular, must be understood as part of a transnational movement. Even a cursory analysis of protest message boards indicates the protesters have been heavily influenced by groups and events overseas. They share a common vocabulary and symbology.

It is clear the January 6 2021 storming of the Capitol Building in the United States, and the more recent Ottawa “freedom convoy”, described by Ottawa police as a “threat to democracy”, have inspired some protesters.

Many actors within these movements have track records of violent rhetoric and extremist sentiment, and the threat of future violence cannot be discounted. Indeed, it must be considered likely.

These movements must be also be understood as associated with the global right-wing populist surge that has resulted in the election of authoritarian governments, led by “strong men”, in countries ranging from the United States, Hungary and Poland to the Philippines, India and Brazil.

These leaders claim to speak for the “people”, framing themselves as outsiders to a corrupt and broken political system. They promise to deliver radical change, though merely aim to replace the current powers. We saw this most famously with Donald Trump’s promise to “drain the swamp”.

While a key element of winning democratic elections is indeed to be the most “popular” party, far-right authoritarian populists prey on social division and seek to exploit anger and fear to gain political capital. We see this in the actions of United Australia Party leader Craig Kelly and some fringe members of the Liberal Party such as George Christensen. These men have sought to frame themselves as champions of the protest movement, but their actions may be understood as cynically stoking social division for political gain.

Read more:
Who are the ‘Original Sovereigns’ who were camped out at Old Parliament House and what are their aims?

In this case, the prize is seats in parliament and the potential to hold the balance of power, forcing major parties to negotiate favourable outcomes for mining magnate Clive Palmer, via the United Australia Party.

In the Canberra convoy, we are witnessing the consolidation of an alliance between diverse, yet highly political, groups infected with conspiracy and far-right ideas. They then intersect with right-wing populist politicians intent on exploiting these events for political gain.

This is, in many respects, new ground in Australian politics. The question remains as to how successful this alliance will be at the ballot box.

Josh Roose is part of a project funded by The Australian Research Council: ‘Far Right in Australia: Intellectuals, Masculinity and Citizenship’ (DP200102013).

– ref. How ‘freedom rally’ protesters and populist right-wing politics may play a role in the federal election – https://theconversation.com/how-freedom-rally-protesters-and-populist-right-wing-politics-may-play-a-role-in-the-federal-election-176533

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Niamh Troy, Researcher, Telethon Kids Institute

Babies who get bad lung infections are at higher risk of developing asthma later on, a condition that affects 10% of Australian kids and costs Australia A$28 billion a year.

Our new paper, published overnight in the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, looked at how OM85 improves babies’ defences against bad lung infections. OM85 is a mix of molecules extracted from bacteria that commonly infect the respiratory tract.

This follows our previous research which found treatment with OM85 protected susceptible babies from severe lung infections. This latest work shows OM85 provided babies with an early immune boost, leading to stronger defences against severe infections. This meant when these babies got a lung infection, their immune system could respond more effectively and they didn’t get as sick.

So taking the treatment could halt the development of asthma by protecting babies’ lungs from damaging infections in the early years of life.

What is OM85?

OM85 is a treatment made from a mixture of crushed up bacteria. It was first used in Europe in the 1970s, and since then, it has been used to prevent recurrent and wheezy lung infections in susceptible adults and kids. It’s commonly sold across the world under the brand name Broncho-Vaxom, but it’s not yet available in Australia.

Clinical trials have shown it can reduce the rate of lung infections in asthmatic children by around 40%.

A small number of people taking OM85 may get gastrointestinal upset, but overall, trials have shown the treatment is safe and any side effects are mild.

Strategies to prevent lung infections are extremely limited in babies, because there aren’t any vaccines against the most common respiratory viruses, such as RSV and rhinovirus. OM85, and other similar treatments in clinical trials, may provide a promising solution.

Despite this, there has been ongoing scepticism.

OM85 is a non-conventional medicine. Most drugs contain known active ingredients. However, OM85 contains multiple components that are likely to synchronise to stimulate the immune system.

Until now, there was no strong evidence for how the treatment actually works. We set out to find this missing piece of the puzzle and learned OM85 trains the “innate immune system”.

What’s the innate immune system?

Our immune systems have two key components.

The innate immune system is the defensive line that pathogens (like viruses and bacteria) first encounter when they enter our body.

While the innate immune system is taking shots at invading microbes, the second line – the adaptive immune system – is mobilising its elite fighters.

We have known for a long time that vaccines can provide a training system for the adaptive immune system.

But recently, scientists have discovered the innate immune system can be trained in a different manner. This is an exciting and emerging field.

Read more:
Explainer: how does the immune system work?

How did OM85 train the immune system?

Our previous clinical trial, conducted with collaborators at The University of Queensland, found OM85 protected high-risk babies from bad lung infections.

We found the strongest protection was when they took OM85 in their first winter, when babies were between five and nine months old.

But nobody has ever looked at how the treatment actually works in this context, which was the focus of our new work.

To pinpoint how the treatment worked, we studied how these babies’ immune systems reacted when faced with a range of infections.

Babies who got OM85 had a number of key changes to their first-line defences. They had a mild boosting of “interferons” – proteins that are critical early in an infection. They also had reduced amounts of inflammatory proteins, which can be damaging when levels get too high.

These two components of the innate immune system (interferons and inflammation) play a critical role in immune defence. Problems with either component have been implicated in an increased risk of developing asthma.

OM85 comes in a powder form that the parents in our study mixed with water or milk for their babies to ingest. OM85 then enters the gut, which contains lots of immune cells and gut bacteria. Signals travel from the gut to the bone marrow where more immune cells are made. We think OM85 can communicate through this messaging system to ultimately provide the positive benefits we discovered.

Babies are beginners when it comes to fighting infections – their immune system has to rapidly learn how to behave and strike a balance between clearing infection quickly while minimising damage to the lungs.

From the moment babies are born, they are exposed to microbes that bombard the immune system, sending critical messages that guide the immune system to develop and mature.

A lack of these beneficial exposures in early life makes kids more susceptible to asthma (and other chronic diseases). Our innate immune system has evolved alongside bacteria, but our modern lifestyle often reduces the contact that we have with these bacteria that are needed for healthy immune development.

OM85 acts as an “immune trainer”, replacing these vital microbial signals that shape the immune system early in life.

Niamh Troy does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. We boosted babies’ immune systems and it protected them from serious lung infections: new research – https://theconversation.com/we-boosted-babies-immune-systems-and-it-protected-them-from-serious-lung-infections-new-research-175338

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Grace Wei, PhD Candidate, Brain and Mind Centre & School of Psychology, University of Sydney

The COVID pandemic has had a huge impact on people living with dementia and their family carers around the world. Our study, published today, found people with dementia experienced worse symptoms after the pandemic began.

Carers reported their loved ones were more disoriented, restless and withdrawn. They also reported poorer mental health themselves as a result of the pandemic.

Dementia is an umbrella term that describes a range of progressive neurological disorders, such as Alzheimer’s disease and frontotemporal dementia.

The number of people living with dementia has more than doubled in the past 20 years worldwide. Dementia currently affects approximately 480,000 Australians, and one in ten people over the age of 65.

Nearly 1.6 million people in Australia care for someone living with dementia.

Given the progressive, neurodegenerative nature of dementia, deterioration of symptoms generally occurs gradually over time. However, we found an accelerated decline of symptoms over a short period of time (within a few months) during the pandemic, which may not be attributable to the typical course of dementia.

Why is the pandemic particularly challenging?

People with dementia can have difficulties understanding why public health measures are important. They may not understand why they can no longer hug or kiss their loved ones, or see them in person.

Symptoms of dementia such as perseverative behaviour (which might manifest as inflexibility to changes in routines) and disinhibition (which might involve approaching or touching strangers) can make it harder to follow public health guidance for social distancing, washing hands and wearing masks.

Read more:
How to support a person with dementia as lockdowns ease

Mask wearing can also be uncomfortable and impact the person’s ability to recognise and communicate with other people.

Lockdowns and bans on visitors in aged care facilities have led to increased social isolation.

Loss of access to health, respite and community services have removed essential sources of support for both people with dementia and their family carers.

Worsening symptoms of dementia

From April to November 2020, we conducted an online survey of 287 carers of people with dementia, from clinics in Australia, Spain, Germany and the Netherlands.

We asked carers about the impact of the pandemic on the person they were caring for, as well as their own mental health, social support and knowledge about the COVID pandemic.

We found 39% of people with dementia had worse depression since the COVID pandemic.

More than one-third of people with dementia had worse apathy (loss of motivation) and anxiety. They also had worse delusions, that is, unshakeable beliefs about things that are not true. For example becoming increasingly paranoid or suspicious of unfamiliar surroundings, such as people wearing personal protective equipment (PPE), and changes to their daily routines, such as not being able to see their families.

More than one-quarter had worse irritability and agitation compared to before the pandemic.

People with dementia who weren’t living with their carer (for example, those in aged care facilities) had a higher risk of worse outcomes. These symptoms may be exacerbated by the reduction in meaningful contact with their loved ones, and disconnection from their usual social activities and routines.

What about carers?

More than half of carers reported they had worsened mental health since the pandemic began and 63% had a reduced social network.

Carers said they had difficulty managing day to day, due to the social isolation and the relentlessness of the condition.

Read more:
How communities can fight the stigma that isolates people with dementia

Female carers reported worse mental health than male carers. While female carers are generally more likely to report greater stress, throughout the pandemic, women have also had to take on more household and family responsibilities and may be increasingly time-poor.

For those caring for someone living in an aged care home, not being able to visit their loved ones was distressing and added to their stress.

Interestingly, carers in Spain were less likely to report worsened mental health than carers in Australia and Germany. Intergenerational living and greater familial support networks for those living at home may have helped lessen the impact on carers’ mental health.

Balancing protection and social connection

Compassionate care is vital during the pandemic, and helps to maintain cognitive and physical stimulation, and meaningful social connections.

To help support carers and people with dementia during the pandemic, we have developed a free, evidence-based toolkit, with tips on communicating health messages, managing symptoms and staying connected.

Understanding the lived experience is key to inform policy and health settings to balance risk and quality of life. Our findings suggest COVID restrictions, particularly on visits to aged care facilities, may lead to an accelerated decline for people with dementia, and poorer mental health outcomes for carers.

Encouragingly, national cabinet has endorsed a more “nuanced” approach to managing COVID-19 in aged care, rather than locking down entire facilities.

Going forward, we need to find other ways to protect people from virus transmission while also considering the psychological impact of isolation.

Read more:
Lockdown and dementia: for some, COVID-19 has created an isolated, confusing but calmer world

Fiona Kumfor receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council.

Grace Wei does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Isolated, confused and depressed: the pandemic’s toll on people with dementia and their carers – https://theconversation.com/isolated-confused-and-depressed-the-pandemics-toll-on-people-with-dementia-and-their-carers-176970

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tania Ferfolja, Associate Professor, School of Education, Western Sydney University

Debates about how schools acknowledge gender and sexuality diversity have been ongoing in Australia. It’s often claimed parents oppose the inclusion of gender and sexuality diversity content in the teaching of their children. But our research shows four out of five parents support such content being included in the relationships and sexual health curriculum.

Debate about these issues has been revived by the federal Religious Discrimination Bill and the NSW One Nation’s Education Legislation Amendment (Parental Rights) Bill. The now-shelved federal bill would have allowed religious schools to expel transgender and gender-diverse students. The NSW bill seeks to revoke the accreditation of educators who discuss gender and sexuality diversity in a public school.

Both bills would have the same effect: the erasure of gender and sexuality diversity from schools.

Read more:
NSW inquiry rejects expert advice on Parental Rights Bill, and it will cause students to suffer

Until now there has been no comprehensive research in Australia that examines what parents actually want in relation to such topics in their child’s education. This lack of research-based evidence has meant even teachers are unsure about whether or not they are allowed to discuss gender and sexuality diversity.

Our landmark study, published in the journal Sex Education, sheds light on this issue. Our findings challenge the idea that most parents oppose the inclusion of gender and sexuality diversity-related content in school.

What did the study find?

We surveyed 2,093 parents of students attending government schools across the nation. To ensure results could be considered nationally representative, data were weighted using a probability panel of Australian adults. Both demographic markers (including gender, location and languages spoken at home) and attitudes to education that’s inclusive of gender and sexuality diversity were used to weight the final data set.

The survey asked fundamental questions about parents’ views on the “who, what, when” of relationships and sexuality education. There was a specific focus on how parents felt about including gender and sexuality diversity in the curriculum.

The findings show 94% of parents want relationships and sexuality education in schools, in keeping with the current Australian Curriculum. When asked about gender and sexuality diversity across six different topic areas, on average, 82% of parent respondents support their inclusion as part of the relationships and sexual health curriculum from kindergarten through to year 12.

In terms of understandings of gender diversity by students at different ages, two-thirds of parents (68%) want this topic introduced in the curriculum by the end of stage 4 of schooling (years 7 and 8). In keeping with other areas, over 80% of parents support its inclusion by the end of year 12.

Parents’ reasons for supporting inclusion were apparent in their views on the purpose of relationships and sexual health education. Given a choice of four central purpose statements, the largest group of parents (nearly 50%) felt this curriculum area should focus on student “empowerment, choice, consent, and acceptance of diversity”.

It’s about fairness, inclusion and safety

These findings reflect the culture of fairness and inclusion that most Australians believe in. The results point to parents’ understanding of the importance of inclusion. They object to the school-based harassment of gender and sexuality diverse students in this country.

Read more:
9 in 10 LGBTQ+ students say they hear homophobic language at school, and 1 in 3 hear it almost every day

These young people are rarely represented in curriculums. They are not only invisible, but also experience discrimination by omission.

Parents are likely to know Australia has one of the highest rates of youth suicide in the world. Tragically, the rate is even higher for gender and sexuality diverse young people. Their experiences at school are undoubtedly linked to this outcome.

In our study, nearly 90% of parents wanted to see the curriculum address discrimination and bullying of gender and sexuality diverse people. This finding speaks to their desire to create safe and welcoming schools for all students.

What does this mean for teachers?

This research has important implications for teachers of relationships and sexual health education. Many report they avoid gender and sexuality diversity and fear community backlash.

Teachers’ unease prevails despite federal government guidance that promotes the well-being of students. The guidelines encourage schools to create positive learning environments that foster diversity and respectful relationships and support students to feel safe, connected and included.

Read more:
Free schools guide about inclusiveness and climate science is not ideological — it’s based on evidence

The public response to the Religious Discrimination Bill and its subsequent shelving highlights how it is inherently anathema to punish and exclude children and young people from school based on their identity. Australian teachers need to be supported to create a school culture where these students can feel safe, welcome and informed about their relationships and sexual health.

Educators across the country would benefit from additional guidance and support to feel confident that discussing these topics is in line with the views of the majority of their students’ parents.

Tania Ferfolja has received funding for this research from the Australian Research Council.

Jacqueline Ullman received funding from the Australian Research Council for the research discussed in this article.

– ref. 4 out of 5 parents support teaching gender and sexuality diversity in Australian schools – https://theconversation.com/4-out-of-5-parents-support-teaching-gender-and-sexuality-diversity-in-australian-schools-176787

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Denis Muller, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Advancing Journalism, The University of Melbourne

Channel Nine’s 60 Minutes segment about the prime minister and his family, broadcast on February 13, was political confectionery so laden with sugar as to be a serious hazard to Scott Morrison’s political health.

It also raised questions about Nine’s commitment to impartial election coverage.

This is a live issue, given that the company is chaired by Peter Costello, the long-serving treasurer in John Howard’s Liberal-National Coalition government.

Nine is promising an equivalent program on the leader of the opposition, Anthony Albanese. It will be interesting to see whether it turns out to be just more confectionery or whether it will contain some political fibre.

One problem is, if it wishes to be seen as even-handed, 60 Minutes will have to dish up the same schmaltzy fare on him too.

Another problem runs deeper.

The Morrison program was framed not around the prime minister but around his wife Jenny, described in the trailer and in the program itself as the prime minister’s “secret weapon” for the election.

This played into Morrison’s hands. He has already fashioned her into a political asset by repeatedly referring to her in press conferences as someone to whom he turns for advice.

Read more:
Texts reportedly referring to Scott Morrison as a ‘psycho’ are in the public interest – but ethical questions remain

The most notorious example was when he sought her counsel about how to deal with the Brittany Higgins rape allegations and she advised him to think about it as the father of two daughters.

Jenny is thus much more, in political terms, than the prime minister’s wife: her persona has become a central part of his political strategy, and the “secret weapon” description reinforces the point. Bizarre, though. She is neither a secret nor a weapon. She has been well tested as a cast member in Morrison’s political theatre.

How 60 Minutes provides a counterpoint to this in the promised Albanese program we will have to wait and see, but it presents Nine with an awkward challenge if it wants to be seen as genuinely even-handed. Will it find some way to promote a central feature of his election campaign strategy too?

The Morrison program was such a naked piece of political marketing that it also raises questions about what demands were made by the prime minister, and what undertakings were given by Nine about how it would be done.

For instance, why was Karl Stefanovic the interviewer and not one of Nine’s serious political journalists, such as Chris Uhlmann?

Why was there no follow-up questioning of Jenny Morrison on the issue of manners?

The need was obvious.

She was free enough with her criticism of the former Australian of the Year Grace Tame for failing to smile for the cameras with Morrison on Australia Day. Bad manners, apparently.

What about Morrison turning his back on Tanya Plibersek in the House of Representatives while she was speaking at the Despatch Box, or grabbing the hands of unwilling Black Summer bushfire survivors when they point-blank refused to shake his hand?

The soft questions to Morrison were cringe-making. “Do you feel our pain?” asked Stefanovic. In answer, Morrison channelled Shylock in the Merchant of Venice: “I bleed”.

Stefanovic gave Jenny a gratuitous boost by telling her what a straight shooter she was.

And indeed she did come across as a thoroughly decent person, giving a mixture of straight and carefully parsed answers, including a convincing apology for the notorious Hawaiian holiday.

Speaking of which, given this damaging history, it seemed odd of the prime minister to choose to play the ukulele.

Read more:
As COVID rips through Australia, is Scott Morrison’s media strategy starting to fail as well?

The risk to Morrison’s political health lies in the heavy public-relations packaging of the program.

A stereotype of him as little more than a PR song-and-dance man has already taken hold, as was seen in the blow-back to his recent foray into hairdressing. He was mocked – on Rupert Murdoch’s news.com, no less – as someone who didn’t hold a hose, the clear inference being that he could evidently hold a salon’s shower attachment.

From the point of view of political strategy, more PR is not what Morrison needs. He needs to look prime ministerial.

60 Minutes gave us only a fleeting glimpse of him in this role, welcoming Stefanovic into his office. But even then it consisted mainly of Stefanovic giving him yet another free kick: “You’re under the pump right now.”

This kind of pap is not what voters want or need as they approach the election, something that was obvious from the program’s dismal ratings.

The preceding program was Married at First Sight, which attracted 961,000 viewers, giving 60 Minutes a strong springboard. However, when it came on, viewer numbers plummeted to 574,000, less than the ABC’s imported whodunnit Vera, and on par with the ABC’s Muster Dogs.

Denis Muller does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Too much sugar, not enough spice: 60 Minutes’ Morrison interview was not journalism, it was confected pap – https://theconversation.com/too-much-sugar-not-enough-spice-60-minutes-morrison-interview-was-not-journalism-it-was-confected-pap-177058

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By James Blackwell, Research Fellow (Indigenous Diplomacy), Australian National University

It has been 14 years since then prime minister Kevin Rudd delivered his apology to the Stolen Generations from parliament house. Words which were so longed for from survivors and descendants of horrific government policies, and which echo through to today.

For the pain, suffering and hurt of these Stolen Generations, their descendants and for their families left behind, we say sorry. To the mothers and the fathers, the brothers and the sisters, for the breaking up of families and communities, we say sorry. And for the indignity and degradation thus inflicted on a proud people and a proud culture, we say sorry.

Scott Morrison’s speech today on the anniversary of this momentous day made headlines for a different reason. Many have taken umbrage with this line:

Sorry is not the hardest word to say. The hardest is ‘I forgive you’.

Scott Morrison almost demanding forgiveness belies a false understanding of both how apologies work, and the nature of what it is the government apologised, and is apologising, for.

The policies of the Stolen Generations were acts of government, designed to assimilate us and deprive us of culture. They are also actions which can be remedied by government. To frame the apology in this way is, as Greens Senator Lidia Thorpe tweeted, “outright disrespect”, and “not an apology”.

A stain upon the nation

The Stolen Generations remain a national shame for this country. Over several decades, roughly one in five First Nations children were taken from their families between 1910 and 1970, countless communities broken up, and our cultures forcibly suppressed.

In some jurisdictions such as Western Australia, the figure is over one in three First Nations children removed. Nationally, these generations and their descendants make up close to two in five First Nations people, according to a report from The Healing Foundation.

The apology, which many thought would not come, and many sadly did not live to see, remains an important part of Australian and First Nations history. Finally the wrongs of the Stolen Generations were not only acknowledged by the government, but apologised for. The apology was, and shall remain, in the words of Linda Burney, a “cultural moment shared by the country”.

Read more:
Thirteen years after ‘Sorry’, too many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children are still being removed from their homes

Apology not without dissent

However, it is easy to remember the apology as a moment of national unity, free from dissent, which is not the case. John Howard, who proceeded Rudd as prime minister from 1996-2007, famously refused such an apology, alongside other measures including a treaty, partly due to the practices of removal being “believed to be in the best interests of the children concerned”.

Howard has continued to defend this failure to issue an apology even decades later, declaring the apology “meaningless” in a January interview.

Howard was of course, not present in the parliament in 2008, having lost his seat at the 2007 landslide election which saw Labor gain government. However, some members of the Liberal and National parties boycotted the event, including controversial former MP Sophie Mirabella, and most notably current Defence Minister Peter Dutton, both of whom have defended their boycott of the apology.

Read more:
First Nations children are still being removed at disproportionate rates. Cultural assumptions about parenting need to change

Action needed to write the wrongs of the past

For those survivors of the Stolen Generations, and their descendants, the effects of these policies are ongoing, and not confined merely to the removal of children and the destruction of families.

The trauma and pain of these policies, and of being disconnected from country, culture, and community, extends down to their children, and their children’s children.

According to The Healing Foundation’s Make Healing Happen report from 2021, Stolen Generations survivors are more likely to not own a home, have worse finances, have experienced violence, suffer from a disability, and to have a criminal record.

Additionally, rates of child removal in Australia have continued to rise over the last decade, with First Nations children ten times more likely to be removed, with over 21,000 in out of home care as of December 2021. This number is projected to increase by a further 54% by 2031. We are going in the wrong direction, and worse, we are doing very little about it.

All of these problems are fixable, and by the government. Presuming forgiveness on the part of those you have wronged, is not going to solve any of these issues. Indeed they are likely to have the opposite effect, reducing the ability of the government to engage with these communities, and impacting upon the mental and physical health of Stolen Generations survivors and their families.

What is needed is a national approach to healing, including reparations for survivors and their descendants (something the government has begun to deliver on). However, increased services for ageing survivors and a national strategy addressing intergenerational effects of child removal are also needed.

In addition, there needs to be accountability going forward on current child removal practices, with an effort to reduce the number of First Nations children removed, and greater supports and structures for those who are, and a Voice for First Nations peoples within our political system.

Action is a much greater apology than words. Forgiveness can only truly come when there is action.

Scott Morrison’s comments today show he does not understand that. I’m not sure if he ever will.

James Blackwell is a member of the Australian Greens, and a member of the Uluru Dialogue at UNSW.

– ref. Forgiveness requires more than just an apology. It requires action – https://theconversation.com/forgiveness-requires-more-than-just-an-apology-it-requires-action-177060

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Arlie Loughnan, Professor of Criminal Law, University of Sydney

The royal commission into veteran suicide returned for its second session of hearings on Monday.

With one veteran dying by suicide every two weeks in Australia and evidence veterans have poorer mental health than Australians overall, this work is urgent and important.

But as the royal commission investigates the risk factors around veterans’ mental health, it is missing a key part of the puzzle: contact with the criminal justice system.

Prison, veterans and mental health

A key part of minimising the risk of veteran suicide is keeping veterans out of jail.

Time in prison is itself associated with a higher risk of suicide. There is also some evidence veterans are over-represented in Australia’s jail system compared to other occupations.

Read more:
‘Life just went to crap’: why army veterans are twice as likely to end up in prison

Nationally, it has been estimated nearly 3% of defence force personnel are arrested within a few years of finishing their military service. About 5% of those who have left full-time military service are reported as being arrested or imprisoned.

We know many veterans have complex mental health disorders – such as PTSD – as a result of their military service, and this can lead to criminal conduct and time in prison.

In Australia, the mental health of veterans who have been in prison is not well understood. Prison and military service separately increase the chance of suicide, and this tends to indicate that veterans who have been in jail have a significantly increased risk of suicide.

Recognition is not enough on its own

Military service – including training and deployment – can of course be traumatic and dangerous. It is also done on behalf of Australia. Because of this, veterans are owed a particular debt by government and society.

In 2019, new federal legislation recognised the need to support veterans and their families. But this was largely a symbolic act. We need proper investigations into the complex, continuing, and uncomfortable consequences of military service on veterans’ health and welfare.

The key issue is how society can best support veterans returning to civilian life. This includes strategies to prevent veterans ending up in the criminal justice system, but also offer specialised support to those who do.

Specialist veterans courts

This sort of support already exists in the United Kingdom and United States. In the US, for example, eligible veteran defendants have a specialist pathway out of the criminal justice system through veterans’ treatment courts.

Read more:
One veteran on average dies by suicide every 2 weeks. This is what a royal commission needs to look at

In general, these courts provide treatment to veterans who have committed nonviolent crimes and are suffering mental health disorders related to military service. A growing body of evidence suggests these courts are more successful at preventing re-offending than jail time, and also improve the health and well-being of participants.

Could this work in Australia?

There are several similar models in operation in Australia, including the NSW drug court and mental health courts for other at-risk groups such as those with drug addictions and serious mental illnesses.

A veterans’ court would be a problem-solving court, with an emphasis on rehabilitation, allowing service providers and veteran peers to work with veterans to move away from criminal conduct.

Individuals participating in veterans’ court processes may have their sentence suspended or their sentencing hearing deferred while they complete a drug treatment program or other treatment option. On successful completion of the program, the individual may even avoid a prison term.

What next for the royal commission

The royal commission will provide an interim report by August 11 2022 and a final report by June 15 2023 – so there is still time for a thorough consideration of veterans’ contact with the criminal justice system.

This is relevant under the terms of reference. While they do not specifically mention the courts or criminal justice system, they do include “systemic issues and any common themes among defence and veteran deaths by suicide”.

Read more:
We studied 50 years of royal commissions — here’s how they make a difference

Further work with veterans’ bodies in Australia will be necessary to determine the feasibility of and demand for veterans’ courts. But once this work is done, such courts could provide a practical, evidenced-based way to help those who have served our country.

If you or anyone you know needs help or is having suicidal thoughts, contact Lifeline on 131 114 or beyondblue on 1300 22 46 36.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. The royal commission must find ways to keep veterans out of jail – https://theconversation.com/the-royal-commission-must-find-ways-to-keep-veterans-out-of-jail-176880

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Leah Mercer, Associate Professor of Theatre Arts, Curtin University

Review: And the Earth will Swallow Them Whole, choreographed by Rachel Arianne Ogle

The first act of And the Earth will Swallow Them Whole, performed in Perth’s aptly-named Studio Underground, positions the audience around the edge of a three-sided balcony looking down into the black space and an open-topped grand piano.

Pianist and composer Gabriella Smart begins with a solo rendition of Beethoven’s Moonlight Sonata. She is subsequently joined by composer Luke Smiles who manipulates and extends the piano sound to co-create a live score that transforms the familiar piano sonata into something new and unrecognisable.

Created on an electronically prepared piano, the score is a disconcerting amalgam of classical piano and electronic distortion. At times we see the pianist’s hands at work but no longer hear sounds that you’d usually associate with a piano.

It is an unsettling and deeply engaging prelude to the entrance of the dancers.

As the ensemble of six dancers come into view they seem, at first, weightless, almost adrift. The added plane provided by watching them from above creates an almost vertiginous effect in the viewer.

The longer you look down the more your sense of perspective is challenged and unmoored. Akin to that tingling sensation in the soles of your feet when you keep your eyes on the track as the train pulls into the station, there is a sense of simultaneously falling and standing still. The movement of the dancers seems to mirror that state.

They warp and weft between connection and disconnection, evoking rescue and sacrifice, of each other and themselves.

From our perspective the dancers sometimes seem almost supine. They create images that hold and then just as quickly disintegrate. Their exquisite ensemble work is beautifully sculptured by Bosco Shaw’s lighting design that seems to both hide and reveal.

The work segues seamlessly through variations of movement until the haze lifts to reveal a kind of landscape of markings on the floor. I am reminded of Gertrude Stein’s response upon first looking down at the flat landscape from the window of an aeroplane, of how it consolidated her resistance to the specificity of time and place.

Without familiar reference points we are all time, all space. And so the dancers are individuals, pairs, whole nations, falling away and raising again, together and alone, history passing.

The first act finale introduces another layer to the view from above making gorgeous use of a piece of fabric that billows and falls, engulfs and retracts around the lone figure of dancer (Zee Zunnur). Facilitated by the other dancers it is a mesmerising allusion to the title of the piece.

Equal parts hypnotic and repellent, it speaks to a sense of temporality and frailty in the face of unstoppable external forces and it is a particular highlight.

Immersive patience

The second act provides an immediate change of perspective as the audience enters through different doors to arrive on the floor with the dancers. Standing or sitting, we circle the dancers as they enact rituals of devotion, death and burial around the figure of Zunnur.

For the audience, it is an exercise in immersive patience. By the end the actions and focus of the performers have transformed both the space and the atmosphere so there is a sense that we are all breathing together, as equal observers and participants.

Here again the lighting, sound and design work together exquisitely. The live score, like the bodies of the dancers, builds and breaks down and builds again, constantly transforming, like all of us.

In collaboration with her dancers and creative team, choreographer Rachel Arianne Ogle’s adherence to an exploration of mortality and death is steadfast and all-encompassing.

Casting a cartographical eye on the space between life and death And the Earth will Swallow Them Whole is an impressive collaboration between artists, a work that deals in images and sounds that leave an indelible imprint on the senses.

And the Earth will Swallow Them Whole plays at Perth Festival until February 14.

Leah Mercer does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. The new dance work And the Earth will Swallow Them Whole is unsettling and deeply engaging – https://theconversation.com/the-new-dance-work-and-the-earth-will-swallow-them-whole-is-unsettling-and-deeply-engaging-176801

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sharon Horwood, Senior lecturer in Psychology, Deakin University

For more than a decade we’ve been deeply immersed in a love affair with social media. And the thought of ending things can be painful. But like any relationship, if social media is no longer making you happy – and if curating your online persona is exhausting instead of fun – it might be time to say goodbye.

Late last year Meta (previously Facebook) came under intense scrutiny after leaked documents revealed the company was fully aware of the negative impact its products, Instagram in particular, can have on users’ mental health.

Meta went straight into damage control. But it seemed no one was particularly surprised by the news – not even teenage girls, who Meta identified as most at risk. Was the leak just confirming what we already suspected: that social media has the potential to be much more harmful than helpful?

How did our once carefree relationship with social media turn sour? And perhaps most importantly, can (or should) it be salvaged?

Spotting the red flags

Relationship counsellors will often ask troubled couples to think about what made them happy in their relationship. Social media, for all it’s annoying peccadilloes, does have some redeeming features.

Throughout the pandemic, the ability to stay connected to people we can’t see in person has become incredibly valuable. Social media can also help people find their tribe, particularly if the people in their offline world don’t share their values and beliefs.

But if you can’t go a day without trawling through the sites, feeling compelled to “like” or be “liked”, your relationship is in trouble.

Though far from settled, the bulk of screen time research focuses on the detrimental effects of excessive or problematic screen use on well-being and mental health. A 2021 meta-analysis of 55 studies, with a combined sample size of 80,533 people, found a positive (albeit small) association between depressive symptoms and social media use.

An important finding was that negative consequences were more likely to come from how social media use made participants feel, rather than how long they used it.

Information overload

In trying to understand why social media can leave us feeling less than content, we can’t look past the effect of the 24/7 news (and fake news) stream on our collective psyche.

A 2021 Deloitte survey of Australians found 79% thought fake news was a problem, and only 18% felt information obtained via social media was trustworthy. Having to navigate content that deliberately aims to perpetuate fear and dissent only adds to people’s cognitive and emotional burden.

But here’s the rub. It seems while we’re generally concerned about technology having a negative impact on our well-being, this doesn’t translate to behaviour change on an individual level.

My own research published last year found more than two-thirds of survey participants believed excessive smartphone use can negatively impact well-being, yet individual usage was still very high, averaging 184 minutes per day. There was no relationship between the belief and the behaviour.

Read more:
The privacy paradox: we claim we care about our data, so why don’t our actions match?

What leads to this apparent cognitive-behavioural dissonance? The results of a long-term study by University of Amsterdam researchers might provide a clue. They found living in a “permanently online” world leads to decreased self-control over social media use and, subsequently, lower well-being.

In other words, we know what we’re doing might be bad for us, but we do it anyway.

Simple steps you can take

How do you know when it’s time to reevaluate your relationship with social media? There’s one deceptively simple question to ask yourself: how does it make you feel?

Think about how you feel before, during, and after you use social media. If you feel like you’re wasting large chunks of your day, your week (or dare I say, your life) on social media – that’s a clue. If you feel negative emotions like sadness, anxiety, guilt, or fear, you have your answer.

But if divorcing social media abruptly feels like a step too far, what else can you do to slowly break away, or potentially salvage the relationship?

1) Start with a trial separation

A “soft delete” lets you see how you’ll feel without your social media before committing to a hard delete. Let friends and family know you’re taking a break, remove the apps from your devices, and set yourself a goal of maybe one or two weeks where you don’t access the account/s. If the world is still turning at the end of this trial, keep going! Once you no longer feel the pull of social media, you’ll be ready to hit delete.

2) Reduce the number of platforms you engage with

If you have Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, TikTok, YouTube, Snapchat, WhatsApp, Tumblr, Pinterest and Reddit on your phone, tablet and computer, then you’re probably past saturation point and into drowning territory. Pick one or two apps that genuinely serve a meaningful purpose for you and ditch the rest. Gen X’ers find it hard to say goodbye to Facebook, but Gen Z have largely bid it farewell. If they can do it, so can you!

Read more:
New evidence shows half of Australians have ditched social media at some point, but millennials lag behind

3) If steps 1 and 2 are still too much, try to reduce your time spent on social media

First and foremost, turn of all your notification (yes all of them). If you’re conditioned to respond to every notification “bing”, you’ll find it almost impossible to stop responding to it. Set aside some time each day and do all your social media catching up or browsing. Set an alarm for your predetermined time allocation and when it sounds, put the phone down until the same time tomorrow.

None of this will be easy, and walking away from social media might hurt at first. But if the relationship has become uncomfortable, or even abusive, it’s time to take a stand. And who knows what untold happiness you might find, beyond the four walls of your screen?

Read more:
Does social media make us more or less lonely? Depends on how you use it

Sharon Horwood does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Want to delete your social media, but can’t bring yourself to do it? Here are some ways to take that step – https://theconversation.com/want-to-delete-your-social-media-but-cant-bring-yourself-to-do-it-here-are-some-ways-to-take-that-step-176149

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jonathan W. Marshall, Postgraduate Research Coordinator, Western Australian Academy of Performing Arts, Edith Cowan University

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander readers are advised this article contains names of people who have died.

Review: Panawathi Girl, written by David Milroy and directed by Eve Grace Mullaley, Perth Festival with Same Drum and Yirra Yaakin Theatre Company.

Viewing David Milroy’s new musical Panawathi Girl, the production is inevitably refracted through the fame of Jimmy Chi’s equally ground-breaking 1990 Perth Festival premiere Bran Nue Dae.

Both are comedic music theatre works authored by First Nations artists from northern Western Australia, set in 1969, and staged with a live, rocking band.

This aside, they are very different.

Bran Nue Dae is a tropical love story which, while alluding to the complex racial divisions and crossings typical of Broome, offers a feelgood portrayal of the protagonist’s sexual and romantic awakening.

In contrast, Panawathi Girl is a buoyant yet cynical depiction of racial conflicts in the Western Australian countryside, self-consciously set in a fantasy of an Australian past: violence free, brightly coloured and populated by surprisingly sympathetic white politicians.

Through this fantasy, however, comes a telling critique of our own times.

The rodeo comes to town

It is 1969. Reformist Labor leader Gough Whitlam (Luke Hewitt) is heading for election against lacklustre Liberal prime minister John Gorton (Geoff Kelso).

As Gorton confides to Whitlam, despite the Labor minister’s support for land-rights, it seems an impossibility to “close the gap” – a clever if depressing reference to the 2008 Closing the Gap agreement and its woeful implementation.

A rodeo has come to the town of Chubb Springs, where the places in which people can drink and live are divided between the “blacks” and “whites”.

Although the 1967 referendum means Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are now formally part of the national population, they are often excluded from voting and other rights.

Read more:
‘Right wrongs, write Yes’: what was the 1967 referendum all about?

Molly Panawathi (Lila McGuire) is the estranged daughter of local white farmer Chubb (Peter Docker). Molly has come to Chubb Springs to learn about her presumed dead mother Pansy (Angelica Lockyer). Having been brought up in Perth away from Country and culture, she is not welcomed by the local Aboriginal community.

Billy (Wimiya Woodley) is sick of the flack he gets from other mob for playing the role of loudmouthed rodeo drunk and has decided he will “head out bush… get my head straight.”

His sister Ada (Teresa Rose) has chosen to keep working for her lanky but intimidating boss Buckley (Maitland Schnaars), who passes as white.

Molly eventually stages a joyous rebellion of sorts at the rodeo ball, complete with a wonderful drag turn by her queer city friend Jojo (Manuao TeAotonga). Like a true panto villain however, Buckley is unrepentant.

“50 years from now,” he explains, leaning comfortably back in his tall frame, “nothing will have changed.”

Idiosyncratic and appealing

The gentle country-and-western twang of pedal steel guitar (played by Lucky Oceans) competes with the more rhythmic strums of conventional guitars (electric and acoustic) to take us from uncertain, yearning songs performed by Molly and others, to party pieces, and other tunes.

There is even a dash of tuba to underpin the sillier moments, some Andrews Sisters-style harmonies with Ava’s slightly awkward turn at the ball, and a particularly demented elegy to a Palomino pony who has become sandwich-meat from Molly’s hippy friend Beth (Grace Chow).

Gorton and Whitlam come together as a recurring double-act, adding political depth and humour to proceedings. Their song and dance routine The Land of the Long White Sock is a particular highlight.

Rodeo broncho buster Knuckles (Gus Noakes) gives some impressive boot scooting in the style of Oklahoma! and Noakes has the finest voice in the cast.

While other actors have beautiful character voices, their vibrato and sustain is not strong. Even in the climactic moments, they don’t belt it out.

But despite this lack of strength, the casts’ voices are idiosyncratic, appealing, and either crack or soar as required, adding to the vaudevillian feel.

Celebration, and critique

Panawathi Girl’s antecedents are at least as much the hilarious but politically pointed vaudevillian Australian music theatre works The Legend of King O’Malley (1970) or Manning Clark’s History of Australia (1988) as they are Bran Nue Dae.

Milroy’s canny political references and criticisms are woven throughout an enjoyably diverse array of styles and references, from Oklahoma! to electrified country, from vaudeville double acts, to wistful solos, set in a kind of Neverland past where everything from the safari suits, to the stripey clothing and Whitlam’s reformist rhetoric, are amplified and celebrated.

But although much of the play feels like a celebration, with an engaging tone and musical appeal, underneath it is truly a critique of how far those dreams have receded in 2022.

As Milroy states in the program, “fifty years on it is difficult to maintain the same optimism.”

Panawathi Girl played as part of the Perth Festival. Season closed.

Jonathan W. Marshall does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. A new musical, Panawathi Girl, is a fantasy of Australia’s past – and a critique of Australia’s present – https://theconversation.com/a-new-musical-panawathi-girl-is-a-fantasy-of-australias-past-and-a-critique-of-australias-present-176696

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Carly Steele, Lecturer, Curtin University

Of the original 250-plus languages and over 750 dialects spoken by First Nations peoples before 1788, only 12 are being learned by children today.

However, widely spoken contact languages – creoles and dialects – have emerged. One example is Aboriginal English, which is a broad term used to describe the many varieties of English spoken by Aboriginal people across Australia. Another example is Kriol, which is a creole language spoken across northern Australia.

These contact languages are not always recognised as the full languages they are by some educators and society generally.

Because of this, many First Nations children are not treated as second language learners. Their languages are sometimes viewed as deficient forms of Standard Australian English and can be “invisible” to teachers and education systems.

To improve educational outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children who do not speak Standard Australian English as their first language, their language backgrounds must be recognised and valued.

Read more:
The state of Australia’s Indigenous languages – and how we can help people speak them more often

What are contact languages?

Contact languages form when communication is essential between speakers of two or more languages. In Australia, this occurred between the speakers of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander languages and English speakers after the British invasion in 1788.

A variety of contact languages developed which are both similar to, and different from, each other. Some languages are more closely related to English, while others have more features of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander languages. Many of these contact languages are not officially named.

The features of contact languages often reflect the impacts of colonisation for communities across Australia. These factors contribute to their lack of recognition in Australian society, including school systems.

Read more:
New Aboriginal languages course should count towards ATARs

Our study

Little is known about contact languages, but many First Nations children all over Australia come to school speaking them as their first language.

Our research was conducted at three primary school sites in Far North Queensland. One group was made up of monolingual Standard Australia English speaking children. The other two groups were Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children who spoke Indigenous contact languages. The First Nations groups were located near each other, but despite their proximity, they differed.

One of the two First Nations groups was in a rural town where Standard Australian English is widely spoken and the children had a diverse range of language backgrounds. The other was in an Aboriginal community where one contact language was primarily spoken and exposure to Standard Australian English was limited.

Our research is intended to make the Standard Australian English language learning needs of many First Nations children more “visible” to educators. We identified some of the linguistic differences between Standard Australian English and the contact languages these First Nation children speak for testing.

First, we compared the short-term memory capacities of the three groups. The short-term memory capacities of all groups were the same, demonstrating all the children had the ability to store language in their short-term memories for immediate use.

Next, these students were asked to orally reproduce a range of simple sentences given to them in Standard Australian English to gauge their proficiency. There were 18 simple sentences of different syllable lengths – six, nine and 12.

Sample sentences included:

• The dog barks at the cats (six syllables)

• In the bush, they built houses from sticks (nine syllables)

• He always eats mangoes in the park with his friends (12 syllables).

Each sentence was marked for grammatical accuracy in Standard Australian English. The speaking ability of all three groups differed significantly. On average, the Standard Australian English-speaking group recorded 71.1% accuracy, the group of First Nations children with diverse language backgrounds scored 45.1% and the others who spoke the same contact language and lived in an Aboriginal community scored 29.6%.

We also examined students’ knowledge of four Standard Australian English grammatical features:

• the prepositions “at”, “in” and “on”

• plural “s” on nouns, for example cats

• simple present tense with a third-person singular “s”, for example, she runs

• simple irregular past tense, for example, they ate.

The Standard Australian English-speaking group and the speakers of contact languages differed significantly in all aspects except for the prepositions “at”, “in”, and “on” where there was no difference.

For the other grammatical features, the difference of accuracy between the Standard Australian English speakers and second group ranged from 12.1% to 20.8%, and for the third from 20.1% to 45%. Simple present tense with the third-person singular “s” was the most difficult feature for the speakers of Indigenous contact languages, and plurals the easiest.

These findings highlight the close relationship that exists between Indigenous contact languages and Standard Australian English, as well as the significant differences.

Speakers of Indigenous contact languages may be proficient in some aspects of Standard Australian English, as demonstrated by their use of prepositions but not others. The findings also showed significant differences between the two groups of First Nations children, which probably reflect their diverse language backgrounds and their differing levels of exposure to Standard Australian English.

Read more:
Meet the remote Indigenous community where a few thousand people use 15 different languages

Why does it matter?

Our findings showed the Standard Australian English speaking ability of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students improved over their primary school years. However, it never reached the levels of their monolingual Standard Australian English speaking peers.

As children progress through school, the Standard Australian English language and literacy demands increase at such a rate that language gains are unlikely to be identified in either classroom-based or standardised assessments. Consequently, students’ achievements may not be visible or recognised in the classroom.

The impact of this can be seen in continued narratives of deficiency surrounding Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander learners. The educational and social implications of this are considerable, and the educational outcomes for First Nations children who speak contact languages are a national disgrace.

Read more:
How caring for children can help Aboriginal Elders during lockdown

What can be done?

To meet the Standard Australian English learning needs of First Nations students who speak contact languages, their languages must be recognised and valued in the classroom. Contact languages need to be treated with respect and understanding, and not viewed as incorrect forms of Standard Australian English.

To show respect and promote learning, we encourage teachers to learn about students’ first language/s and include them in the classroom. Students should feel free to express themselves in whichever language they choose, recognising their first language/s play an important role in learning.

All teachers need to understand how language is learned and should be supported to effectively teach Standard Australian English alongside curriculum content. Language skills are the cornerstone of literacy and educational development. Teachers should explicitly teach Standard Australian English and provide students with the opportunity to practise their language skills.

Targeted training needs to be delivered in initial teacher education courses and through professional development for those already teaching.

In the current climate of heavy responsibilities on time-poor teachers, sufficient funding and time must be given for teachers to gain the skills required.

To provide a fair and equitable education for all, the language backgrounds of First Nations children should be embraced in their education settings and the broader systems.

Carly Steele received funding from the Australian Government Research Training Program and the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for the Dynamics of Language to conduct this research as part of her PhD at the University of Melbourne.

Gillian Wigglesworth receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC) as a Chief Investigator on the Centre of Excellence for the Dynamics of Language (CE140100041) and also holds two Discovery Projects funded by the ARC related to her work with Indigenous children whose first language is not English.

Dr. Graeme Gower does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Invisible language learners: what educators need to know about many First Nations children – https://theconversation.com/invisible-language-learners-what-educators-need-to-know-about-many-first-nations-children-175917

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lisa Portolan, PhD student, Institute for Culture and Society, Western Sydney University

The days of speedily updating your Facebook status the moment a new relationship is made official are long gone. In fact the Facebook relationship update could be described as somewhat passé, replaced instead by a new form of social media relationship documentation – the “soft” or “hard” launch.

Social media oversharing has become a commonplace occurrence – and the trend of PR speak creeping into the realm of relationships and intimacy is only growing. The soft and hard launch trend combines both.

Love, labour and the consumer marketplace have always been intrinsically linked, and the evolution of “public dating” via social media documentation is worthy of investigation. The internet, and platforms like Instagram and TikTok, give rise to a new visual language of relationship milestones. A language which is highly nuanced, and interlaced with semiotics, gender scripts and cultural capital.

You’ve most likely seen examples of celebrity hard or soft relationship launches discussed in the media, and copied by regular people on their own social media.

The ‘soft’ or ‘hard’ launch – a definition

For those unfamiliar with the relatively new celebrity-led trend of soft or hard launching a relationship (predominately) on Instagram or TikTok, it sees users subtly (“soft”) or explicitly (“hard”) revealing a new relationship via a photograph or video and accompanying caption.

A soft launch might involve an image of two hands clasped together, think the Kourtney Kardashian/Travis Scott intimacy reveal, while a hard launch might feature the lucky couple locking lips (think Jennifer Lopez and Ben Affleck). Zendaya and Tom Holland’s Instagram soft launch was widely reported and speculated on – the use of the phrase “my Spider-man” a subtle choice.

This trend made famous perhaps by two of the greatest Instagram lovers and documenters – actress Megan Fox and musician Machine Gun Kelly – has ushered in a new age of seemingly unhinged, cringeworthy lovers posts on Instagram from ordinary people.

It might seem another strange social media phenomenon, but it’s a noteworthy cultural episode. Not only is it a way for media and tabloids to report on celebrity relationships, but it’s become a widely used tactic for regular people to broadcast to families, friends and followers their intimate lives.

Insta-official internet guides

If you’re looking to dive right into the new trend of social media relationship documentation – caution, you’re entering a maelstrom of complex relationship milestones.

You might want to follow one of the many “Insta-official” internet guides which handily outline the best way to launch and document your relationship on social media.

You might also want to consider in advance what to do with the content if the relationship falls apart – will it be an erasure of the evidence? Or a public statement announcing the end of the relationship?

The digital dating breadcrumbs left behind require attention.

PR speak creeping into intimacy

Love as a marketable commodity is by no means a new concept. Nor the entrenchment of labour and love. In Labor of Love: The Invention of Dating, author Moira Weigel writes that dating as we know it came about in the late 19th century, when there was a shift from private to public courtships.

Romantic encounters moved from cloistered exchanges in the home, under the supervision of family and friends, to public and commercial spaces like restaurants, bars and the movies. Weigel writes, “Almost everywhere, for most of human history, courtship was supervised. And it was taking place in non-commercial spaces” – until the explosion of public dating.

This public shift, meant that love came to be characterised by the consumer market-place. The signs, symbols and milestones of dating intertwined with consumption, and the visual economy. The visual economy applies to being seen – engaging in the romantic consumer spectacle.

However, the internet gives rise to a whole new sharing of visual consumer romantic signposts. In the digital domain, the language of love, the visual and the marketplace become truly entangled.

Your romantic social stocks

Use the Instagram-official blueprint correctly, and your social stocks will likely soar. Take as evidence Kourtney Kardashian’s Instagram account which grew by 44 million in 2021 following her relationship Insta-reveal. Love is after all the most popular hashtag on Instagram.

Cultural theorist Lauren Berlant reminds us that when we’re told to “get a life”, it usually refers to the need for a person to find an intimate relationship. The milestone of finding a life-partner, is indeed, seen as a critical one which continues to hold cultural and social relevance. When we narrativise our lives, there are a number of acceptable pathways available, and the romantic union is a highly recognisable one, which has developed a certain visual formula within the social media space.

My own research into dating apps and intimacy demonstrate how users come to recognise these signs as an indicator that an important relationship has commenced.

However, one might question in this highly scripted domain, is there room for subversion? For living an intimacy outside of the realm of super-saccharine and contrived Instagram-moments?

My research would indicate that in the space of dating and the digital domain, there are disruptions, but there are also continuities. This means new dating behaviours emerge in the digital space, but for the most part dating narratives remain the same – for example, a romantic proclivity for finding the one. Often these continuities reflect an update from an IRL (in real life) space to the digital realm.

The “soft” or “hard” launch of a relationship could be seen as an extension of a key courtship milestone – becoming official, building on and surpassing more traditional milestones like meeting the friends or family or anniversaries. However, the focus on the self as a brand, and the self-in-love as the premium brand, requires our vigilance.

Lisa Portolan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. What is a ‘soft’ or ‘hard’ relationship launch? Explaining the celebrity led trend – https://theconversation.com/what-is-a-soft-or-hard-relationship-launch-explaining-the-celebrity-led-trend-176531

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alison Reeve, Deputy Program Director, Energy and Climate Change, Grattan Institute

In an analysis recently released to News Limited newspapers, the Morrison government claims banning new coal and gas projects in Queensland would risk 53,000 jobs and A$85 billion in investment.

But we checked the job claims and found them highly exaggerated.

The government analysis, released by federal Resources Minister Keith Pitt, came in response to a call by the Greens for a six-month moratorium on new coal, oil and gas projects.

We analysed the most recent government data. We found even in an extreme scenario where all new coal and gas projects are banned, reductions in future Queensland jobs would be at most one-tenth of what the minister claims.

A ban won’t affect every project

The most recent government dataset lists 44 coal projects and nine gas projects in Queensland. Two of the gas projects have already started production, so we discounted these from our analysis.

The rest of the dataset comprises the following projects:

• six “committed” projects: those with environmental and planning approvals and a final investment decision

• 29 “feasible” projects: undergoing detailed analysis on their commercial viability, and awaiting environmental and planning approvals

• 16 “announced” projects with no detailed work behind them yet.

Committed projects wouldn’t be affected by a ban, because authorities have already approved them. That means associated jobs won’t be affected either. Some 2,700 construction jobs and 2,086 operational jobs are associated with these projects.

The ban would only affect projects not yet approved – the 45 projects classified “feasible” or “announced”. From now on we’ll refer to these projects as “uncommitted”.

If all 45 of these projects went ahead, it would create 26,853 additional construction jobs in Queensland and 19,131 operational jobs – or about 46,000 jobs in total.

À lire aussi :
Labor’s plan to green the Kurri Kurri gas power plant makes no sense

Not every project will be developed

Most of these uncommitted projects will only ever exist on paper.

Official data reveals 29 of the 45 uncommitted projects have been on the books for five years or more without moving to “committed” status.

Of the projects that were uncommitted in 2017, only five were listed in 2021 as committed or operating. This progress rate is much worse for coal than gas. Half the gas projects on the books in 2017 are now committed or operating, compared to just 6% of coal projects.

If this trend is repeated over the next five years, just one in two Queensland gas projects and one in 16 Queensland coal projects would proceed. This would mean Queensland could expect 4,406 new coal and gas jobs, comprising:

• 3,013 additional jobs in construction (1,488 in coal and 1,525 in gas)
• 1,393 additional operational jobs (1,168 jobs in coal and 225 in gas).

It’s these 4,406 jobs that wouldn’t be created if there was a ban on new coal and gas projects – a far cry from the 53,000 estimated by the Morrison government.

Some 18 projects in the dataset don’t report job numbers, and our analysis doesn’t assume any jobs from these projects. Three of these are committed or complete (so there are more jobs locked in than our estimate of 4,786 suggests). Fifteen are uncommitted, meaning our estimate of the jobs impacted by a ban might be slightly low.

We also examined historic data for the small number of committed projects where job number estimates were provided. None created more jobs than their initial estimate, and some provided fewer.

In one case, Adani’s Carmichael mine, there were 975 fewer construction jobs and 2,270 fewer operational jobs in the 2021 data than estimated in 2017.

So, all this suggests even the more realistic job numbers we calculated aren’t guaranteed to come to fruition.

À lire aussi :
Japan wants to burn ammonia for clean energy – but it may be a pyrrhic victory for the climate

Bigger worries for regional Queensland

Overall, at least 4,786 jobs are locked in for Queensland from committed projects. A further 4,406 could be expected over the next five years if other projects go ahead.

Those 4,406 jobs, most in regional areas, are a lot to give up. In a small regional town, even an extra ten jobs can mean the local primary school retains all its teachers, the bank stays open and the pub remains viable. We shouldn’t dismiss the importance of this.

Queensland relies on coal and gas jobs more than some other states. But scaremongering and inflated claims about foregone jobs don’t help the debate – or help people who live in regional areas.

If the world is serious about achieving its collective goal of net-zero emissions, we can expect Australia’s coal exports to fall by 60% between 2020 and 2030.

It is this falling demand, not a moratorium or a ban, which will have the biggest effect on jobs and regional communities. And it is here that whichever party wins the 2022 election must focus its attention.

À lire aussi :
45,000 renewables jobs are Australia’s for the taking – but how many will go to coal workers?

Tony Wood owns shares in a range of companies, including in energy and resources, through his superannuation fund.

Alison Reeve ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.

– ref. ‘Highly exaggerated’: experts debunk Morrison government claim of 53,000 fewer jobs from coal and gas ban – https://theconversation.com/highly-exaggerated-experts-debunk-morrison-government-claim-of-53-000-fewer-jobs-from-coal-and-gas-ban-176811

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Wasim Awal, Doctor of Medicine, Griffith University

Osteoarthritis is one of the leading causes of disability, affecting more than 500 million people globally.

Most doctors encourage physical activity, maintaining a healthy weight and short-term use of a simple painkiller like paracetamol to manage the pain.

Opioids, like codeine, morphine or oxycodone, have a reputation as powerful painkillers and are commonly prescribed for persistent osteoarthritis pain. Up to 40% of people with knee osteoarthritis in the US are treated with opioid medicines.

People who begin taking opioid medicines to treat chronic pain conditions like osteoarthritis may end up taking them on an ongoing basis and expose themselves to serious harms including dependence, overdose and even death.

In Australia, deaths from opioids now exceed the national road toll.

In our new study, published today, we reviewed all the relevant research and found opioids only offer very small benefits for the relief of osteoarthritis pain. Patients – and their doctors – need to carefully weigh up the risks and benefits of taking these commonly prescribed medicines for the treatment of osteoarthritis.

Read more:
1 in 5 Aussies over 45 live with chronic pain, but there are ways to ease the suffering

Small shifts on the pain scale

Opioids are types of narcotic drugs that work on the central nervous system to relieve pain. Our team from the University of Sydney and Sydney Musculoskeletal Health conducted a large review of 36 randomised controlled trials that compared opioid medicines to a placebo (or inactive pill) for osteoarthritis pain of the knee or hip. This kind of review represents the highest level of research evidence.

The combined trial results show the overall effects of opioid medicines compared to placebo on important outcomes such as pain and function.

The review found opioid medicines provide a very small improvement in pain and function compared with placebo. This improvement amounted to approximately 5 points or less on a 0 (no pain) to 100 (worst pain imaginable) pain scale. These modest effects are similar to what is expected if using paracetamol for osteoarthritis and less than one-third as effective as certain non-steroidal anti-inflammatory pills or creams including ibuprofen.

Our findings add weight to other research into the effectiveness of opioids. Australian researchers observed late last year that opioids were no more effective than mild painkillers after surgery for fracture.

Read more:
Opioid script changes mean well, but have left some people in chronic pain

More was not more effective

Importantly, we found no significant link between the dosage amount of opioid medicine and the level of pain relief. So, if an opioid medicine isn’t helping manage pain, increasing the dose is not likely to provide any further benefit.

The harms of opioids are well known, particularly at higher doses. Common side effects include nausea, constipation and fatigue. The review revealed the risk of experiencing unwanted effects like these when taking an opioid is almost 1.5 times greater than when taking a placebo.

Opioids also carry a risk of tolerance, which happens when the current dose is no longer helpful in managing the pain and a larger dose is needed to achieve the same effect.

These medicines can also lead to dependence, where stopping the opioid suddenly can lead to unpleasant withdrawal symptoms such as an inability to sleep, agitation, sweating and heart palpitations.

The risk of life-threatening overdose events is high with regular use of opioid medicines, as opioids inhibit the part of the brain that regulates our breathing. Opioids are the most common cause of drug-induced deaths in Australia, with 1,121 deaths reported in 2019 alone. The majority of these deaths (around 56%) resulted from prescription opioid medicines rather than illicit opioids such as heroin.

Scientists are working on new pain-relieving compounds that activate opioids receptors but are safer for patients.

Read more:
Designing less addictive opioids, through chemistry

Patients get hooked and fast

In the past few years, growing evidence has revealed taking opioid medicines for just a short amount of time can lead to persistent use.

About 24% of patients who use opioid medicines for 12 days will continue to use opioids for at least a year. This goes up to 43% after just one month of opioid use.

With long-term use, the risk of adverse effects is greatly increased, especially as it is likely people will need higher doses to achieve the same level of pain control.

Chronic pain conditions like osteoarthritis are also commonly treated with long-acting formulations of opioid medicines such as OxyContin. However these types of opioids, which are intended to be taken regularly instead of only when needed, are associated with a six-fold increased risk of overdose compared with short-acting formulations.

Choose wisely

Our new findings will provide people with realistic expectations about the benefits these drugs can provide for chronic pain. Then they can carefully weigh this up with the risks.

Opioid medicines provide modest benefits for osteoarthritis which is similar to, or considerably less than, more simple analgesics like paracetamol or ibuprofen.

If you do choose or are prescribed to start an opioid medicine, discuss the benefits and potential harms with a doctor first. If you are concerned about the amount of opioid medicines you are using, or the duration you have been using them, speak with your doctor about a dose-reduction plan.

Christina Abdel Shaheed receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council

Christopher Maher holds funding from Government (e.g NHMRC) and not-for-profit agencies (e.g HCF Research Foundation) to support investigator-initiated research.

Wasim Awal does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Opioids ease osteoarthritis pain only slightly. Their deadly risks need to be weighed against any benefit – https://theconversation.com/opioids-ease-osteoarthritis-pain-only-slightly-their-deadly-risks-need-to-be-weighed-against-any-benefit-171936

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Chiara Neto, Professor of Physical Chemistry and Australian Research Council Future Fellow, University of Sydney

Snow machines have exploited the laws of thermodynamics to paint the slopes of Beijing white for this year’s Winter Olympics.

Beijing might seem like an odd place for the winter games. The city receives almost no annual snowfall and has an average temperature just below 0℃, even in the winter month of February.

Chinese authorities have used more than 350 snow machines to prepare courses for the world’s athletes. This practice has become more common over the past few Winter Olympics, with the Sochi and Pyeongchang games relying on 80% and 98% artificial snow, respectively.

But isn’t all this artificial snow terribly expensive? If you own an air conditioner and keep half an eye on your energy bill, you’d expect snowmaking to be hugely energy-intensive. The uninitiated might think of snow machines as giant freezers with fans attached, guzzling cities’ worth of electricity to refrigerate entire mountainsides.

This isn’t really the case. Efficient machines in suitable climates (such as Beijing’s) can use as little as 1.5 kilowatts per cubic metre of snow produced. In Beijing’s climate, you could coat a Sydney apartment in a few inches of snow with the same energy the air conditioning would use in an hour.

But that’s not to say there’s no environmental cost. More on that later.

How do snow machines work?

Artificial snow is no chemical trick. The slopes of this year’s event are coated in pure frozen water.

Fundamentally, snow machines work by using a clever thermodynamic exploit, leveraging the natural cooling that happens when water evaporates. And because their cooling power comes from evaporation, they can operate at relatively warm temperatures, up to 1℃ (provided the humidity is low enough).

Here’s how it works. Snow machines expel a fine water mist into the cold, dry atmosphere. Some of the water in each droplet quickly evaporates, carrying away heat and lowering the temperature of the rest of the droplet to below its freezing point. This process is known as “evaporative cooling”, and is the same mechanism that cools us when we sweat.

Because the energy loss required to form ice in this process is driven by evaporation, snow machines don’t have to expend energy to freeze water. They only require energy to power the fans and compressors that disperse the water droplets.

However, as any winter Olympian will tell you, snow is more than just frozen water. And snow machines must produce a blanket of powder worthy of the world’s greatest athletes.

They achieve this by using a “nucleator”, which is basically any substance that makes it easier to form an ice crystal. Without this, the droplets in the mist would end up as supercooled water and clump into large droplets before freezing. This would create undesirably dense and icy snow.

Nucleators can be chemical or biological, but in Beijing no such aids are being used. Instead, tiny ice crystals are being used as nucleators. These nucleator ice crystals themselves are formed by yet more thermodynamic manipulation, wherein pressurised water is forced through a nozzle, quickly reducing the pressure and breaking it into tiny droplets.

When the pressure of a gas is rapidly reduced, its temperature also drops – which is why deodorant from a pressurised spray can feels cold. In this case, the sudden drop in temperature cools the atomised water well below 0℃, rapidly freezing it into the nucleator ice crystals.

In the final step of the snow-making process, these ice crystals mix with the water mist and are propelled through the air, with the water freezing and falling as artificial snow. Propulsion is achieved either through the use of compressed air, in the case of snow lances, or through blower-type machines with large fans.

The snow that forms in this process isn’t quite the same as real snow, because artificial snow forms quickly from liquid droplets, instead of slowly from water vapour. As a result, the shape of artificial snow particles is different to that in natural snow. The former has no beautiful single-crystal structures, only tiny (polycrystalline) snowballs.

The sustainability question

As our climate warms and weather patterns shift, we’re becoming increasingly dependent on artificial snow to meet the demands of holidaymakers and sportspeople. These Winter Olympics are the first ever to rely on 100% fake snow. And while snowmaking isn’t as environmentally catastrophic as it might first seem, it’s not without drawbacks.

First, artificial snow is made of water, which is undeniably a critical resource. The International Olympic Committee’s (IOC) sustainability report for this year’s games estimates the city of Zhangjiakou, the epicentre of the Beijing games, will use 730,000m³ of surface water for snowmaking alone (almost 300 Olympic size swimming pools).

Read more:
Two-thirds of Earth’s land is on pace to lose water as the climate warms – that’s a problem for people, crops and forests

The amount of water used across the entire Beijing area will be much greater (although there are significant efforts to recapture snow melt, and avoid using an excessive amount of drinking water to make snow).

Second, in warmer climates chemical additives are required to help snow form and stay frozen. And while these aren’t actively toxic, there’s still doubt regarding their safety.

Finally, snow machines produce a lot of snow. Early reports from Chinese media claimed only 200,000m³ of water would be needed for snowmaking. But the IOC’s pre-game report indicates this figure is upwards of 800,000m³.

Depending on which figure is used, the density of the snow created, and how much water is lost to evaporation, the total amount of snow produced could be anywhere from 0.5 to 3 million cubic metres. So while the machines do produce snow efficiently, the total energy usage is still significant.

According to the IOC, in Beijing this electricity demand is being met through 100% sustainable production. This is encouraging, and will hopefully help accelerate the global adoption of environmentally friendly technologies.

Read more:
How do Olympic freestyle skiers produce their amazing tricks? A biomechanics expert explains

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. We couldn’t have the Beijing Olympics without snow machines. How do they work, and what’s the environmental cost? – https://theconversation.com/we-couldnt-have-the-beijing-olympics-without-snow-machines-how-do-they-work-and-whats-the-environmental-cost-176795

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kenny Travouillon, Curator of Mammals, Western Australian Museum

Kangaroos have such a taste for leaves that they have evolved the ability to eat them on at least four separate occasions during their evolutionary history, a new fossil discovery reveals.

Today, there are more than 60 species of kangaroos, wallabies, bettongs and rat-kangaroos living throughout Australia and New Guinea. But their diversity in time is even more incredible: just 100,000 years ago, Australia had many species of giant kangaroos, including the giant short-faced kangaroos which, bizarrely enough, didn’t hop but instead walked rather like a theropod dinosaur such as Velociraptor.

Going further back in time, to around 20 million years ago, there were plenty more interesting kangaroos, some of which were direct ancestors of today’s species. Generally, these species were no larger than a wallaby, but they were impressively diverse, including kangaroos with fangs, kangaroos that could eat meat, and more besides.

We know all this thanks to the amazing fossils discovered at Riversleigh World Heritage Area in north-western Queensland – arguably Australia’s most celebrated fossil location. So far, around 30 species of prehistoric kangaroos have been found here. And the two most recently discovered ones add another interesting twist to their evolutionary tale.

Our latest discovery, published today, names two new species of ancient kangaroos: Gumardee webbi and Gumardee keari, which lived alongside one another around 18 million years ago in the Riversleigh rainforest.

They are represented by a few partial skulls and several jaws, which can tell us a lot about the biology of these extinct animals.

These kangaroos would each have weighed 3–4 kilograms, roughly the size of a quokka. But what’s most intriguing about them is their teeth. The pattern of blades on their molars is best suited to eating leaves from trees and bushes. This is surprising, because their ancestor, Gumardee springae, which lived around 6 million years earlier at the same location, had teeth better suited to a wider range of foods such as fruits, fungi and insects.

Two previously discovered species, Gumardee pascuali and Gumardee richi, were intermediate to these two groups, both in terms of their evolutionary age and the patterns of their teeth. This means the Riversleigh fossils, taken together, reveal the evolutionary process of kangaroos’ teeth changing and adapting to different foods.

Read more:
Ancient bilby and bandicoot fossils shed light on the mystery of marsupial evolution

A taste for leaves

Remarkably, this is not the first time this has happened in the fossil record of kangaroos. In the late 1990s and early 2000s, the late palaeontologist Bernie Cooke studied Riversleigh’s kangaroos in great detail and discovered that the ancestors of modern kangaroos were generalists, eating mostly forest fruits, fungi and insects, and slowly evolved the ability to eat leaves over time.

Today, kangaroos and wallabies only eat leaves from bushes or grass, whereas rat-kangaroos, bettongs and potoroos eat fungi, fruits and insects, similar to ancient kangaroos.

He even demonstrated that another family of ancient kangaroos at Riversleigh, the fanged kangaroos, independently evolved the same ability to eat leaves at roughly the same time.

Another independent evolution of leaf-eating was also identified from fossil sites in South Australia – the third documented instance in kangaroos.

The two new species discovered at Riversleigh therefore now represent the fourth time leaf-eating has been seen to develop in the kangaroo fossil record.

Read more:
Giant kangaroos were more likely to walk than hop

Competition in the rainforest

Only one of these four groups (the Riversleigh species studied by Cooke) is a direct evolutionary ancestor of today’s kangaroos and wallabies. The other three groups that pioneered leaf-eating all eventually died out: the South Australian species around 23 million years ago; the Gumardee group around 15 million years ago; and the fanged kangaroos around 10 million years ago.

The obvious questions that arises are: why did these groups all die out, and does this mean today’s kangaroos and wallabies have evolved to eat a risky and highly specialised diet?

We know their ancestors ate fruits, fungi and insects, but then again so would have many other species of marsupials, such as bandicoots and possums. In fact, there were so many of these various marsupial competitors that would have made evolutionary sense for ancient kangaroos to branch out into other foods – particularly leaves, which would have been available all year round, as opposed to seasonal fruits.

So why didn’t they survive? They weren’t the only ones evolving the ability to eat leaves at the time. It happened in possums, koalas and wombats, so the competition was tough.

We have always known Australia is a tough place to survive. Riversleigh’s fossils, which span more than 10 million years of Australia’s evolutionary history, shows just how tough it would have been.

Kenny Travouillon receives funding from Western Australian Museum. This study was funded by the Robert Day Postdoctoral Fellowship at the University of Queensland. Facilities for the completion of this research were provided by the University of Queensland, Queensland Museum, Western Australian Museum and the University of New South Wales.

– ref. Quokka-sized fossil species show kangaroos evolving to eat leaves – for the fourth time – https://theconversation.com/quokka-sized-fossil-species-show-kangaroos-evolving-to-eat-leaves-for-the-fourth-time-176155

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ullrich Ecker, Professor of Cognitive Psychology and Australian Research Council Future Fellow, The University of Western Australia

Claims Prime Minister Scott Morrison is a liar have been piling up.

From French President Emmanuel Macron, to former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and most recently, Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce, there have been high profile accusations Morrison has not been truthful. Some media outlets have even started a dossier of Morrison’s “lies and falsehoods”.

(Asked last November if he had ever told a lie in public lie, Morrison said, “I don’t believe so”.)

We are cognitive psychologists who study misinformation. What impact do politicians’ lies have on voters? What happens when their lies are exposed?

Lying as an everyday event

It is important to note that people lie all the time. Some studies show the average person lies about twice a day.

This is not without its advantages. In fact, people who are brutally honest can find themselves in socially awkward situations (“You look terrible in those pants, love”).

Most lies are harmless and serve mainly to avoid uncomfortable moments, help people make a good impression, or make others feel good (“Of course I remember you!”).

But lies of course can also be more sinister. For example, I can mislead you in order to make you do what I want you to do. (“Can you deal with the paperwork? I have so much going on…”)

These lies can have negative consequences – the person lied to may feel duped or the liar may be caught out. However, some studies claim lies of this sort have helped humans develop the ability to work together.

Politicians who lie

Lies can be used to get others to form false beliefs and garner their support. It is well known that false information can influence people’s thinking even after they come to realise the information is false.

This makes it particularly concerning when people in leadership positions lie. Former United States President Donald Trump famously made more than 30,000 false or misleading claims during the four years of his presidency. This is an average of more than 20 a day.

But isn’t that just what we’ve come to expect of politicians? They rank as one of Australia’s least trusted professions. They spin the truth to make themselves seem more capable and successful than they are and appeal to whoever they are talking to at the time. They make promises they know they won’t be able to keep. Much like us, really (“We’ll catch up soon, for sure!”).

What do voters think?

So, the big question is: do voters care? The answer is not straightforward.

Our research has shown identifying a lie reduces people’s belief in it, even if the lie comes from a politician they support. However, this does not necessarily translate into a reduction in voter support or a change in voting intentions.

Read more:
Alternative facts do exist: beliefs, lies and politics

In one study, we exposed American participants to lies (and true statements) Trump made in the lead up to the 2016 presidential election, followed by fact-checks of these statements.

Although fact-checks led to reduced belief in inaccurate claims, this did not translate to reduced voting intentions in Trump supporters.

A follow-up study used lies from both Trump and Democrat candidate Bernie Sanders. It found when Trump and Sanders supporters were shown many more lies than accurate statements, they began to feel more negatively towards the politician they support – but only slightly.

What about Australian voters?

However, in a parallel study conducted in Australia in 2018, a different picture emerged.

When participants were shown the fact-checks, they significantly reduced their support for the politician in question (in this case Turnbull or Labor’s Bill Shorten) – regardless of their own partisan position. In other words, when voters thought Australian politicians were mostly telling lies, their feelings and voting intentions changed.

A similar pattern emerged in our forthcoming UK-based study. While this study has not yet been peer-reviewed, we found participants reduced their feelings and voting intentions for politicians following fact-checks, particularly for politicians they support (likely due to low baseline support for opposition politicians).

The truth does matter

So it turns out voters do penalise Australian politicians for lying, particularly if they make a habit of it. We think that is a good thing, for several reasons.

First, the things leaders lie about often matter to many people. Our prime minister, for example, has been accused of deviating from the truth on issues including the vaccine rollout, our response to climate change and the use of public funds.

Read more:
Is Morrison gaining a reputation for untrustworthiness? The answer could have serious implications for the election

Second, politicians have power and are supposed to represent us. Ideally, their decisions should be based on facts and evidence in pursuit of the common good. If politicians develop a laissez-faire relationship with the truth, it means they are abusing their position, not accountable, and failing as role models (“If the leader can lie – and get away with it – so can I, right?”).

At a broader level, a functional democracy depends on common appreciation of basic facts. Yes we can debate how to respond to climate change, but genuine debate is only possible if we first accept the evidence that the climate is changing. If truth is seen as unattainable, anything goes. And if politicians ultimately do and say whatever they want, why bother engaging with politics at all?

As we have also seen recently, in times of crisis, mutual trust between government and the public produces greater compliance and better outcomes for everyone. Lies poison this trust.

From this perspective, then, we should not accept lying politicians, and the media is well advised to hold our elected representatives to account. And if our Australian study is anything to go by, how our politicians deal with truth may end up affecting voters at the ballot box in May.

Ullrich Ecker receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Toby Prike does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. We know politicians lie – but do we care? – https://theconversation.com/we-know-politicians-lie-but-do-we-care-176578

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hannah Brown, Science Strategy and Operations Manager, Victorian Heart Institute, Monash University

We’ve seen it in our favourite romantic comedy – and for many of us, we’ve even felt it in real life. The door of the café swings open, in walks the person of your dreams. Momentarily you’re paralysed. Temporarily overwhelmed. And then you feel it, in your chest.

Is it love at first sight? Is your heart really beating faster than normal? Does it feel – even just for a second – like it’s skipped a beat?

It turns out the movie scenes, songs and poems are right to some extent. Feelings of love and attraction do affect the heart.

Read more:
Friday essay: 3 ways philosophy can help us understand love

A heartful of feelings … also blood affected by hormones

It’s actually quite normal for your heart to beat faster (or race) – and can happen when you are excited, nervous, angry or even if you’ve had too many coffees.

You’ve probably heard of the fight or flight response. Well, that also explains the feeling of your heart racing during a romantic moment.

Your brain sends a signal to your adrenal glands, two little hormone-producing organs that sit on top of your kidneys. This produces a small boost of the hormone adrenaline. It moves via your bloodstream directly to your heart, where its action is to temporarily make your heart beat faster.

The body appears to react this way, even though you’re not necessarily in danger. If you were running away from a bear, the increased heart rate would prepare your muscles to run. When love or attraction strikes, this might be your body’s way of preparing you to run into the arms of your perfect match.

Phew! So, it’s not life threatening?

Probably not. Particularly if you don’t notice it happening frequently and are otherwise in good health.

In response to a surge of adrenaline, your heart racing is almost certainly due to sinus tachycardia. This is when your heart is still beating in a normal rhythm, but faster – like what happens during a good gym session or a run around the block.

There are other conditions which can cause someone to feel their heart is racing. Supraventricular tachycardia (SVT) is a condition which results from someone having an extra electrical circuit in the heart. We are all born with natural electrical circuits, but some people have an extra circuit. In certain situations, that circuit activates and causes palpitations. While the symptoms of SVT can be disconcerting, it is usually benign and can be easily treated with a small surgical procedure.

Another condition is atrial fibrillation (AF), which results in an irregular and sometimes very rapid heart rhythm. AF is the most common arrhythmia seen in clinical practice by cardiologists and its prevalence increases with age.

Approximately 5-10% of Australians will develop AF in their lifetimes. AF can vary in severity, from occasional episodes of electrical disturbance, to a more serious condition that can result in impairment of how the heart pumps, leading to poorer quality of life and a risk of stroke or heart failure. Some AF is effectively managed with medication, while other people may require cardioversion (delivering a small shock to the heart) or ablation (a procedure which deactivates cells in the heart that cause AF).

Read more:
How to write a love poem

That explains the electricity. But can it actually skip a beat?

Yes. It’s absolutely possible for the heart to skip a beat. That can be triggered by the same things that make your heart race – stress, anxiety, dehydration and a range of other things. These premature beats are almost always benign, meaning they aren’t life-threatening or the sign of a heart attack in the making.

So, whether it’s love, or the excited thrill in anticipation of love – your heart really does behave differently when romance walks in the door. The best thing we can do for our hearts is maintain a healthy lifestyle. That means exercising regularly, quitting smoking and checking in with your doctor for a heart health screen to make sure it’s just love, and nothing more sinister.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Is this love … or an arrhythmia? Your heart really can skip a beat when you’re in love – https://theconversation.com/is-this-love-or-an-arrhythmia-your-heart-really-can-skip-a-beat-when-youre-in-love-176537

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lara Werbeloff, Program Director, Fire to Flourish, Monash University

Many Australians who have survived a disaster feel more confident their communities are prepared for the next one. But a third of those living in disaster prone areas don’t feel at all prepared for a disaster, or confident in their ability to recover well.

These are just some of the findings from the national Fire to Flourish survey run by Monash University, which asked more than 3,500 Australians about their perceptions of preparedness and resilience to disasters.

Our research suggests one of the greatest assets following a disaster is the people who experience them. But this asset is hugely underutilised.

Climate projections indicate disasters are going to increase in frequency and severity. But rather than waiting for disaster to strike, there’s an opportunity to be working directly with communities now to build pre-disaster resilience.

Read more:
Disaster season is here — do you have a Resilience Action Plan? Here’s how the small town of Tarnagulla built theirs

‘Post-traumatic growth’

The Fire to Flourish National Survey surveyed an even split of men and women, and an even division across age ranges and socioeconomic positions.

The biggest difference in perceptions of preparedness and resilience came down to prior experience of disaster.

We found evidence of “post-traumatic growth”, where people experience positive change after adverse events.

Experiencing a disaster in the past greatly influenced how prepared and confident people felt about the future. While disaster survivors are often depicted as victims, this is not how they see themselves.

Disaster survivors:

• reported higher confidence that their communities were prepared for the next disaster (71% of disaster survivors compared with 51% of those who have never experienced one).

• reported higher confidence in their household preparedness (68% versus 43% of those who hadn’t experienced disaster).

• shared information with their communities about local problems and initiatives more regularly (61% versus 49%).

• knew local people who were equipped to step up and lead recovery efforts if they needed to (62% versus 49%).

When asked about future disasters, 67% of survivors said they would cope “well” or “very well” if they experienced a disaster event in the next year. Only 48% of those who had never experienced disaster felt the same way.

Challenging experiences can become a source of strength

When people and communities experience extreme adversity they often develop new skills and capabilities. That makes it more likely they will have a resilient response to their next challenge.

People often perceive an increase in community cohesion after disaster, peaking dramatically in the immediate aftermath.

Even ten years after a disaster, both women and men surveyed recalled higher levels of community cohesion than before the event.

However, not everyone reported similar levels of preparedness or resilience.

Particularly concerning is that one third of respondents living in high disaster prone areas don’t feel at all prepared for a disaster, or confident in their ability to recover well. Nearly half of survey respondents said they wouldn’t cope well, or at all, if they experienced a disaster event in the next year.

Having a say in your own community’s disaster planning

These results shine a light on the need for tailored investment to build community-level disaster resilience.

Disaster-affected communities form the backbone of any disaster response. But survivors are often underutilised in shaping plans for their community’s longer-term resilience and preparedness efforts.

In other words, they may be left out of the long term planning. Nearly half of all people surveyed in our study don’t believe they have the agency to improve their
community. Only a minority believes their community tries new ways of dealing with crises, or that their community has the opportunity to be actively involved in the planning its own future.

Community resilience will increase if disaster survivors are supported to contribute their strengths and unique lived experiences to lead recovery investments tailored to local priorities and place.

Recent research demonstrates the health and economic harms from disasters in Australia are ameliorated if pre-disaster levels of social cohesion and support are high. These foundations need to be supported.

Communities cannot afford to wait for disaster to strike before they start preparing. Yet many communities are not confident they have the support and resources needed to recover from a crisis.

Learning from and supporting other communities

More focus is needed from government, councils and communities themselves on increasing the disaster preparedness of those likely to face a disaster. Building cross-sectoral connections is key.

Another strategy is to strengthen networks between Australia’s communities so we can better support and learn from each other in community-led resilience building.

This means creating opportunities for disaster survivors to share experiences, knowledge and skills to help their own community recover and contribute to the preparedness efforts of Australian communities more broadly.

The survey findings will inform Fire to Flourish’s ongoing program of work, finding new ways to support communities to lead their own local initiatives to strengthen disaster recovery and resilience.

As the survey showed, people living in disaster-affected communities have crucial knowledge and skills, which should be central to any planning and decision-making on disaster responses and preparation.

Read more:
‘Nobody checked on us’: what people with disability told us about their experiences of disasters and emergencies

Fire to Flourish is funded by the Paul Ramsay Foundation and Metal Manufactures Pty Ltd. Additional funding is provided by the Lowy Foundation.

David Johnston receives funding from the Australian Research Council

Jane Fisher receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council, Grand Challenges Canada, Vic Health, the Finkel Family Foundation, the Paul Ramsay Foundation, Ramsay Hospital Research Foundation, Victorian Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions, the Medical Research Futures Fund, and the World Bank Group and Sexual Violence Research Initiative

Rebecca Wickes receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the Victorian Government. This story is part of a series on disaster and resilience, supported by a philanthropic grant from the Paul Ramsay Foundation.

– ref. Disaster survivors feel more prepared for the next one but are often left out of planning – https://theconversation.com/disaster-survivors-feel-more-prepared-for-the-next-one-but-are-often-left-out-of-planning-176674

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rupert Sutherland, Professor of tectonics and geophysics, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington

We think of trees and soil as carbon sinks, but the world’s oceans hold far larger carbon stocks and are more effective at storing carbon permanently.

In new research published today, we investigate the long-term rate of permanent carbon removal by seashells of plankton in the ocean near New Zealand.

We show that seashells have drawn down about the same amount of carbon as regional emissions of carbon dioxide, and this process was even higher during ancient periods of climate warming.

Humans are taking carbon out of the ground by burning fossil fuels deposited millions of years ago and putting it into the atmosphere as carbon dioxide.
The current rate of new fossil fuel formation is very low. Instead, the main geological (long-term) mechanism of carbon storage today is the formation of seashells that become preserved as sediment on the ocean floor.

The continent of Zealandia is mostly submerged beneath the southwest Pacific Ocean but includes the islands of New Zealand and New Caledonia.

Carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels on the continent add up to about 45 million tonnes per year, which is 0.12% of the global total.

Our work documents a project that was part of the International Ocean Discovery Program (IODP). Expedition 371 drilled into the seabed of Zealandia to investigate how the continent formed and to analyse ancient environmental changes recorded in its sediments.

Drawing carbon to the ocean floor

Organic carbon in the form of dead plants, algae and animals is mostly eaten by other creatures, mainly bacteria, in both the ocean and in forest soils. Most organisms in the ocean are so small (less than 1mm in size) they remain invisible, but as they die and sink, they transport carbon to the deep ocean. Their shells can accumulate on the seabed to make vast deposits of chalk and limestone.

Read more:
Tiny plankton drive processes in the ocean that capture twice as much carbon as scientists thought

The sediments we cored were many hundreds of metres thick and formed during warmer climates that might resemble the decades and centuries to come. We know the past environments from analysis of fossils.

Seashells, which are made of calcium carbonate, sequester significant amounts of carbon. The accumulation rate of shells averaged over the last million years was about 20 tonnes per square kilometre per year.

The total area of the Zealandia continent is about 6 million square kilometres, so the average rate of calcium carbonate storage was about 120 million tonnes per year, which is equivalent to 53 million tonnes of carbon dioxide per year.

This is about the same as emissions from burning fossil fuels on the continent today, within errors of calculation. However, a much larger area than just Zealandia is accumulating microscopic seashells.

The planetary carbon cycle

Earth naturally expels carbon dioxide from mineral springs and volcanoes, as rocks are cooked at depth. This is unlikely to be affected by climate change. The Earth stores carbon dioxide when rocks are altered at the surface and as seashells accumulate on the seabed. Both these mechanisms might be affected by climate change.

The biosphere and oceans also hold significant carbon stocks that are sure to change. It is a complex system and many scientists are trying to understand how it will respond to human activities.

Different parts of the carbon system will respond in different ways and at different rates. Our work provides clues as to what might happen in the ocean.

About 4-8 million years ago, the climate was warmer, carbon dioxide levels were similar or even higher than today, and the ocean was more acidic. However, we found the average accumulation rate of seashells on Zealandia was more than double that of the most recent million years.

This is a pattern seen elsewhere around the world. Warmer climates during this period had oceans that produced more seashells, but these data are average accumulation rates over million-year time scales.

The mechanism by which these ancient warmer oceans produced more seashells remains a subject of ongoing research (including ours).

Rivers and the wind deliver nutrients to the ocean, especially during extreme weather events, and changes can occur over short time scales. At the other extreme, fully integrated climate models show that large-scale reorganisation of ocean currents to enhance the supply of nutrients from deep waters could take centuries or even millennia.

Read more:
The ocean is essential to tackling climate change. So why has it been neglected in global climate talks?

Our work highlights and quantifies the important role the ocean, and particularly the microscopic life within it, will eventually play in restoring balance to our planet. The rate at which dead plankton draw carbon to the deep ocean and small seashells permanently store it on the seabed is a significant proportion of human carbon dioxide emissions and it is likely to increase in the future.

Our work reveals that a warmer ocean may eventually produce more calcium carbonate shells than today’s ocean does, even though ocean acidification will almost certainly occur.

How quickly natural carbon sequestration in the ocean might change remains highly uncertain. It will take many centuries before we reach an ocean state similar to that found 4-8 million years ago.

More work is needed to understand how this transition might occur and whether it is possible and sensible to enhance biological productivity in our oceans to mitigate climate change and maintain or increase biodiversity.

Rupert Sutherland has received research funding from the New Zealand Government and IODP Expedition 371 was funded by a collaboration of international governments.

Laia Alegret received funding from the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation and FEDER funds, project PID2019-105537RB-I00.

– ref. Oceans are better at storing carbon than trees. In a warmer future, ocean carbon sinks could help stabilise our planet – https://theconversation.com/oceans-are-better-at-storing-carbon-than-trees-in-a-warmer-future-ocean-carbon-sinks-could-help-stabilise-our-planet-176154

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Hurley, Policy Fellow, Mitchell Institute, Victoria University

International students are returning to Australia after almost two years of closed borders.

The number of international students in Australia increased by 29,856 in the first six weeks after the Australian government opened the border to them in mid-December.

But there are still about 300,000 fewer international students in Australia than before the pandemic. Around 147,000 current student visa holders remain outside Australia.

Read more:
Border opening spurs rebound in demand from international students

It’s not just education institutions that will be anxiously watching the rate at which these students return.

International students are a vital part of the workforce in many industries. In particular, many work in hospitality and carer roles. The Australian government is trying to entice international students to return by offering visa refunds and easing limits on their access to the workforce.

These temporary arrangements highlight the sometimes uneasy relationship between international education, migration and the workforce.

What has changed since the borders opened?

The loosening of border restrictions in December 2021 has reversed the steady decline in international students.

At its lowest point, there were 248,750 international students in Australia. This was a fall of about 57% compared to before the pandemic, and the lowest level since 2007.

Read more:
Why the international education crisis will linger long after students return to Australia

Since the borders reopened, students have returned to Australia in larger numbers from some countries than others.

The numbers of students from India and Nepal have increased the most. Students from these two countries account for over 50% of the increase in the past six weeks.

By comparison, Chinese international students have not returned to Australia as quickly. Over 86,000 of them remain outside Australia. That’s about 60% of all international students who are still overseas.

But this doesn’t mean Chinese students will not return. China recorded the largest increase of any country in student visa holders since borders opened, up by about 5,500. This suggests many new Chinese students have applied for and been granted visas.

These students may be waiting until the start of semester before travelling to Australia.

Read more:
Australia’s strategy to revive international education is right to aim for more diversity

Why is the labour market important?

One reason students are returning at different rates may be due to the labour market.

According to 2016 census data, Indian and Nepalese students are much more likely to be part of the workforce than Chinese students. About 78% of Indian and 87% of Nepalese students are employed in the Australian workforce. This compares to less than 21% of students from China.

The government’s efforts to get international students back to Australia more quickly highlights how important their labour is to many parts of the economy.

The 2016 census showed current and recently graduated international students made up about 2% of the total labour force. This student workforce is concentrated in areas reporting shortages.

Before the pandemic, about 15% of waiters, 12% of kitchen hands and 10% of cooks and chefs were current or recently graduated international students. About 11% of commercial cleaners were current or recent international students.

These occupations have faced widespread difficulties in finding staff.

International students also work in important carer roles. Before the pandemic, about 9% of all nursing support staff and personal care workers in aged care were current or recent international students.

Many other occupations where the pre-pandemic workforce included large numbers of international students are recording vacancies at well above pre-pandemic levels.

Read more:
COVID halved international student numbers in Australia. The risk now is we lose future skilled workers and citizens

What are the implications of students’ role as workers?

Access to the Australian labour market has been a controversial aspect of international education.

International students are required to demonstrate they are a “genuine” student, and not using a student visa to enter the country primarily to work.

Yet the reasons for international students to select Australia as a destination are varied and complex. The ability to work is an important consideration.

Australia uses access to the labour market to compete with other countries for students. In 2008, Australia removed the need for students to apply for a separate work visa. International students have been able to work 20 hours a week. That limit has now been lifted until at least April 2022.

Following the 2011 Knight Review, many international students have been able to apply for a post-study visa. This lets them work in Australia for between one and five years after finishing their course.

Competitor countries are also using post-study work rights to attract a bigger share of international enrolments.

Read more:
International student numbers hit record highs in Canada, UK and US as falls continue in Australia and NZ

The need to temporarily loosen work restrictions shows it is not just universities that rely on international students. Many Australians will benefit from their labour.

In welcoming international students back to the country, it is important to ensure their rights are protected. These students can be particularly vulnerable to exploitation in the workplace. Current visa arrangements can encourage international students to cycle through cheap courses so they can stay in Australia.

As international education recovers, a better understanding of the link between international education, migration and employment can help inform policy that protects everyone’s interests in the sector.

Peter Hurley does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. International students are coming back and it’s not just universities sighing with relief – https://theconversation.com/international-students-are-coming-back-and-its-not-just-universities-sighing-with-relief-176530

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Quiggin, Professor, School of Economics, The University of Queensland

The disruption of the COVID pandemic has led many of us to reconsider our relationship to work, as well as our spending priorities.

Some are eager to return to pre-pandemic “normality”. Others have found working from home to be liberating and are keen to preserve their newfound autonomy.

Still others, such as health workers, are simply exhausted after two years dealing with the ever-changing demands of the pandemic. One manifestation of this exhaustion has been the rise of the “anti-work’ movement”, which rejects the whole idea of paid employment as a way to organise necessary labour.

A less radical response is increased interest in the idea of a four-day working week. A growing number of companies – typically in technology or professional services – are embracing the idea.

Unlike the end of paid work, a four-day week is well within the realm of economic feasibility. But how much, if anything, would it cost in terms of lost production and lower wages?

How did we get to a five-day work week?

In 1856, Melbourne stonemasons became the first workers in the world to achieve an eight-hour working day. It’s a landmark we commemorate with a public holiday in most states and territories (called Eight Hours Day in Tasmania and Labour Day elsewhere).

It took almost a century before the eight-hour day became the norm, and for the six-day week those stonemasons still worked to be reduced. But finally, in 1948, the Commonwealth Arbitration Court approved a 40-hour, five-day working week for all Australians.

A five-day week brought us that great boon, the weekend. Thanks to steady increases in productivity, all this was achieved even while living standards improved steadily.

Read more:
Aussie Rules rules thanks to the eight-hour working day

Increases in leisure continued over the next few decades. In 1945 Australian workers were granted two weeks’ annual leave. This was extended to three weeks in 1963, and to four weeks in 1974. Sick leave, long service leave and an increased number of public holidays all reduced the number of hours worked per year.

But the standard work week remained fixed at five days.

In 1988, the Conciliation and Arbitration Commission cleared the way for the working week to be cut from 40 to 38 hours.

Unionised workers in industries such as construction were able to negotiate slightly shorter hours – 36 hours a week – that made a nine-day fortnight possible (by continuing to work eight hours a day). So while they were still doing the same daily hours as in the 19th century, they were working about one-third fewer days a year.

All this progress came to a halt with the era of microeconomic reform (often called neoliberalism) beginning in the 1980s.

There has been no significant reduction in standard hours since. The actual number of hours worked has ebbed and flowed according to the state of the labour market, but without any clear trend. Employers have consistently favoured longer hours for their core full-time workforce, while workers and unions have pushed for better work-life balance.

Benefits and costs

Some Australian workers already work a nine-day fortnight. (There are no solid numbers on how many, but Australian Bureau of Statistics data suggests it is fewer than 10% of the workforce.) For these workers shifting to a four-day week would reduce their total hours worked by a little more than 10%.

There is a lot of evidence to suggest that reducing working hours, if implemented correctly, can be partly offset by an increase in output per hour. Large-scale trials in Iceland reducing weekly hours from 40 to 36, for example, found no drop in productivity.

However, despite some optimistic claims, there is insufficient evidence to show there will be no reduction in output in all circumstances.

Read more:
The success of Iceland’s ‘four-day week’ trial has been greatly overstated

A plausible guess is that reducing hours by 10% will be associated with a 5% reduction in output.

If this cost were shared equally between employer and employee, workers would have to forgo wage increases of 2.5%. This would correspond to somewhere between two and five years of real wage growth based on recent history in Australia.

The cost to employers would reduce their profits. But over the past 20 to 30 years the share of national income going to the owners of capital as profits (instead to labour as wages and salaries) has increased considerably. This cost would be just a fraction of those gains.

Making the transition

For most Australians working a standard full-time job – a little more than seven hours a day, Monday to Friday – moving to a four-day work week could occur in two stages.

The first stage would be to be shift to a nine-day fortnight with no change in total weekly hours. So the average working day would increase by 50 minutes (from seven hours 36 minutes to eight hours 26 minutes).

The second stage would be to shift to a four-day week with eight-hour working days (a 32-hour working week).

A lot of more detailed questions would still need to be resolved.

Should we choose to extend the weekend to three days, or stick with a five-day week – having different workers taking different rostered days off? Should schools continue to operate five days a week? How will working from home fit in? Will there be even more pressure than there is already to deal with work-related demands on notional days off?

Read more:
A life of long weekends is alluring, but the shorter working day may be more practical

These problems, and others, do complicate the shift to a four-day week. But they are not insurmountable.

The real question, 70 years after the arrival of the weekend, is whether we are ready to trade in some of our increased productivity for a life with more free time for family, friends and fun. Or we do we want to keep on working so we can consume more and live in bigger houses with room to store the stuff we buy to make ourselves feel better about working so much.

There’s a lot of evidence that experiences give us more happiness than material goods. But experiences require time as well as money. A four-day week would be one way to get that time.

John Quiggin does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. There’s never been a better time for Australia to embrace the 4-day week – https://theconversation.com/theres-never-been-a-better-time-for-australia-to-embrace-the-4-day-week-176374

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

Scott Morrison has said he is “devastated” by failing to deliver the religious discrimination legislation but declared he would rather lay down the attempt than see the protections compromised.

He confirmed the legislation is dead for this term – the government will not attempt to revisit it in budget week.

The Prime Minister abandoned the package, which also involved change to the sex discrimination act, after five Liberal defectors combined with Labor and crossbenchers to amend it in the House of Representatives to protect transgender students at religious schools.

The five – Trent Zimmerman, Dave Sharma, Fiona Martin, Katie Allen, and Bridget Archer – acted despite strong pressure from Morrison and have come under attack from some colleagues.

Morrison on Sunday attended St Maroun’s Maronite Church in Adelaide to say he was “devastated” by the result and explain his refusal to compromise .

He said much of his passion for seeking to protect Australians of religious faith from discrimination was based in his deep appreciation of the Maronite community and many of the eastern Orthodox faiths.

Many in these communities had known persecution at home and come to Australia seeking religious freedom.

“That freedom is here. But we sought to add to those protections and we were unsuccessful. And that is a bitter disappointment,” he said.

But he did not regret bringing the legislation forward.

He said it was disappointing this bid to provide more protections “was undermined by those who would seek to undermine the very religious institutions upon which so much of Christian community depends”, including schools and charitable organisations.

Morrison said he’d had to make a very important decision about the legislation, and in doing so “I felt very much like the woman before Solomon”.

According to the biblical story two women had babies, one of whom was smothered when the mother rolled on it during the night. The mother of the dead child put it next to the other woman, and took the living one.

When the women went before Solomon each claiming to be the mother of the living child, he proposed cutting the baby in half.

“And the woman whose child it was said, no, the other woman can have my child. And at that moment, Solomon knew who the mother was,” Morrison said.

“So, I would rather lay down our attempt to secure those additional protections, than see them compromised or undermined.

“And I’m sure that communities of faith all around this country, you all understand that.

“I share your disappointment, but I have not forgotten upon which everything else rests, and that is not something that I would forsake.

“So there will be those who will say that I have been humiliated and all of those things. But [I am] happy to suffer those things in a cause that I believe strongly in and that I know you share. We will see where this goes in the future.”

Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Morrison draws on Bible story to explain refusal to compromise on religious discrimination package – https://theconversation.com/morrison-draws-on-bible-story-to-explain-refusal-to-compromise-on-religious-discrimination-package-177043

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne

NSW state byelections occurred Saturday in the seats of Bega, Monaro, Strathfield and Willoughby. Labor gained Bega and held Strathfield, but the Nationals held Monaro. In Willoughby, the Liberals are likely to hold off an independent challenger.

Current figures could change when postal votes are counted next Saturday, February 19. ABC election analyst Antony Green said postal votes returned so far are over 20% of enrolled voters in Bega, Strathfield and Willoughby, and these percentages don’t include votes in the mail. Owing to COVID, all voters were sent a postal pack, but could vote in-person, early or on election day.

There are also outstanding pre-poll booths in Bega, Monaro and Strathfield. Green said that pre-poll booths not counted on Saturday night will not be completed until Monday.

Bega was easily the best result for Labor. The Poll Bludger’s projection was for a final two party of 56.5-43.5 to Labor, an 11.7% swing to Labor from the 2019 results. Current primary votes are 43.7% Labor (up 13.5%), 36.5% Liberal (down 11.2%), 8.0% Greens (down 2.7%) and 5.6% Shooters (down 1.3%).

In Monaro, Labor had a swing to it, but the Nationals easily retained. The projected two party is 55.3-44.7 to the Nationals, a 4.9% swing to Labor. Current primary votes are 46.9% National (down 5.0%), 33.8% Labor (up 6.4%), 7.5% Greens (down 0.3%) and 6.1% for an independent.

Labor retained Strathfield with very little swing. The projected two party is 54.5-45.5 to Labor, a 0.1% swing to the Liberals. Primary votes are currently 41.1% Labor (down 3.0%), 38.2% Liberal (down 0.8%), 9.5% for an independent and 6.1% Greens (down 2.8%).

The Liberal primary in Willoughby had a large fall, but they would win on current primary votes. The Liberals had 43.5% (down 13.5%) and independent Larissa Penn 32.2%, with 11.9% for the Greens (up 0.8%) and 6.1% Reason. Labor did not contest.

The Electoral Commission selected the Greens as the Liberals’ two candidate opponent, and now need to re-do so it is Liberal vs Penn. With optional preferential voting in NSW, the Liberals’ current lead is enough; the ABC estimates 53.1-46.9 to the Liberals, an 18.0% swing against the Liberal vs Labor two party share in 2019.

Willoughby appears to be the only seat where the large postal vote could overturn the current Liberal lead. While habitual postal voters skew Liberal, it’s possible that progressive voters were more concerned about COVID, and so voted by post. That could offset the normal postal vote skew.

The Bega, Monaro and Willoughby byelections were caused by well-known Coalition MPs resigning, with former premier Gladys Berejiklian resigning in Willoughby, former Nationals leader John Barilaro in Monaro and former transport minister Andrew Constance in Bega.

When an MP resigns, they take their personal vote with them. Labor should have performed better in Monaro, which was Labor-held at the 2003 and 2007 NSW elections. The National margin only blew out from 2.5% to 11.6% at the 2019 election.

Jodi McKay did not become Labor leader until after the 2019 election, so Labor only lost her personal vote as an MP in Strathfield. A near-zero swing is disappointing for Labor.

Green said that, since coming to power at the 2011 election, the Coalition has suffered double digit swings after preferences at every byelection, until the Upper Hunter byelection in May 2021, which the Nationals retained with a 3.3% two party swing in their favour.

In the three seats Labor contested, they had an average two party swing of 5.5%, well below the double digit swings the Coalition has usually copped since 2011.

These byelection results are more consistent with the federal Essential poll last week that gave Labor just a one-point lead after preferences than with the Newspoll two weeks ago that gave Labor a 56-44 lead.

They do not suggest that voters are in a “baseball bat” mood when it comes to either the NSW or federal Coalition governments.

The loss of Bega will knock the NSW Coalition down to 45 of the 93 lower house seats, to 37 for Labor. Two of the crossbenchers are Coalition MPs accused of wrongdoing.

Adrian Beaumont does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Mixed NSW byelection results do not imply voters in a “baseball bat” mood – https://theconversation.com/mixed-nsw-byelection-results-do-not-imply-voters-in-a-baseball-bat-mood-176879

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lavina Lee, Senior lecturer, Macquarie University

The stakes were high when the foreign ministers of the Quad security group met in Melbourne this week. The US has warned a Russian invasion of Ukraine could be imminent. And Russian President Vladimir Putin had just met with his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, and announced a “no limits” partnership between the two powers.

Amid such uncertainty, the main goal of the foreign ministers of the US, Australia, Japan and India was to display unity, resolve and collective strength as a response to the increasing authoritarian challenge to world order.

In the lead-up to the dialogue, US Secretary of State Antony Blinkin laid down the gauntlet, declaring

I would put our partnerships, our alliances, our coalitions against anything anyone else has to offer.

But the Quad members were also keen to show they are not merely reacting to a rival’s agenda, but able to offer their own ambitious, positive and practical contributions to the development goals of smaller states in the Indo-Pacific region.

A force for global good

This objective of recasting of the Quad as not just an anti-China coalition, but a force for global good began over a year ago with the no-strings-attached pledge to donate at least one billion doses of COVID-19 vaccines to developing countries in the region by the end of 2022.

This was a direct response to Beijing’s use of COVID-19 vaccine donations to cast itself as a regional saviour, while simultaneously demanding political concessions from smaller countries.

Read more:
Quad group makes vaccine deal as a wary China watches on

This time around, the Quad foreign ministers were keen to emphasise their vaccine pledge had not been derailed by India’s devastating second wave of COVID infections last year, with more than 500 million doses already delivered to the region.

Such a pledge directly addresses the top priority of Southeast Asian states, whose ability to move to a post-COVID economic recovery has been hobbled by a lack of vaccines, deepening poverty and global inequality.

Additionally, the Quad members signalled their intent to strengthen collaboration on humanitarian assistance and disaster relief. This is a return to the group’s 2004 origins, when the four countries first came together to respond to the Indian Ocean tsunami.

The Quad members have, for example, been active in supporting Tonga after its January volcano eruption. While not openly discussed, such collaboration also provides opportunities for the four countries’ navies to coordinate more closely, which has military advantages.

Countering Chinese actions in South China Sea

Despite the focus in Melbourne on being a force for good, the Quad has not forgotten the realpolitik objective of countering China’s ability to create an uncontested sphere of influence in the Indo-Pacific.

Though not mentioning China directly in their joint statement, the foreign ministers set their sights on countering its expansive and illegal claims over nearly the entirety of the South China Sea.

As the other Southeast Asian claimants to the sea have been consumed with responding to the pandemic, Beijing has deployed coast guard ships, civilian militia vessels, fishing fleets and resource survey ships in ever greater numbers to aggressively block other nations from fishing and exploiting oil and gas deposits in their own exclusive economic zones.

In response, the Quad announced it will deepen engagement with regional partners to build their capacities to safeguard their exclusive economic zones. This includes developing coast guard resources, strengthening information sharing, ensuring freedom of navigation and helping combat illegal fishing.

This approach is very appealing to regional states, such as Vietnam and Indonesia, who are reluctant to openly join an anti-China coalition but are keen to develop their own sovereign capabilities to defend their access to resources.

Read more:
With vision of a ‘free and open Indo-Pacific’, Quad leaders send a clear signal to China

Slight differences in approach

Despite these shared goals, there were slight differences between the Quad members. A conspicuous omission from their joint statement was America’s framing of the global competition with China (and Russia) as an ideological contest between democracies and authoritarian states, or liberal and illiberal regimes.

Australia, Japan and India are reluctant to enter into ideological warfare with China. Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison has at times spoken about the intractable differences between democratic and authoritarian political systems. However, the general Australian approach remains to criticise Chinese behaviour without necessarily implying it is derived from an illegitimate and dangerous authoritarian political system.

Japan, too, is uncomfortable with taking the US approach, fearing it will undermine its foreign policy influence built on a foundation of investment and development aid to quasi-democratic and authoritarian countries alike.

India is the most reluctant of all, having deep historical ties and a strong defence relationship with both the former Soviet Union and now Russia.

India diverged from the other members on the threat of a Russian invasion of Ukraine, instead preferring the Quad focus on Indo-Pacific issues and avoid any agenda that might damage its relationship with Moscow.

At the same time, India would not want to legitimise a Russian invasion of Ukraine, as this might offer Pakistan cover to do the same against Indian-controlled Kashmir.

Nevertheless, the schisms between democratic and authoritarian great powers are widening and will be increasingly difficult to manage.

The good news is the declaration of a Sino-Russian “no-limits” partnership has given even more momentum to the Quad and further strengthened the resolve of the four members to advance a “free and open Indo-Pacific”.

The bad news is we are a few steps closer to outright division between the democratic Quad members and China and Russia, with less room to manoeuvre to find common ground.

Read more:
Russia and China’s growing ‘friendship’ is more a public relations exercise than a new world order

Lavina Lee has received funding from the Australian Department of Defence. She is a member of the ASPI Council.

– ref. The Quad has a strategy to counter China and Russia: be a force for global good without ideological warfare – https://theconversation.com/the-quad-has-a-strategy-to-counter-china-and-russia-be-a-force-for-global-good-without-ideological-warfare-176555

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jennifer Power, Associate Professor and Principal Research Fellow at the Australian Research Centre in Sex, Health and Society, La Trobe University

A focus on pleasure in sexual health education can increase condom use and enhance positive attitudes toward safe sex, according to a new international study led by the University of Oxford.

The study, published today, supports decades of policy and advocacy work seeking to push sexuality education beyond abstinence or risk-based approaches to improve sexual health outcomes.

Read more:
Netflix’s Sex Education is doing sex education better than most schools

What did the researchers find?

The study, a systematic review and meta-analysis, involved collating and analysing all existing research on the topic.

The review included 33 interventions that placed pleasure and fun at the centre of safe-sex messaging. Interventions ranged from sex education workshops to online resources, videos and pamphlets.

The interventions targeted people from multiple countries and backgrounds, including gay men, heterosexual young people and adults, women attending primary care clinics, and men recently diagnosed with a sexually transmissible infection (STI).

Despite this wide diversity in settings and population groups, the studies showed consistent findings. Interventions which affirmed people’s right to pursue pleasurable sex were associated with more consistent use of sexual health services and improved awareness of contraception and preventing STIs.

The meta-analysis combined data from eight interventions aimed at increasing condom use among their target population.

Findings showed emphasising eroticism and fun in condom messaging was more effective at increasing people’s uptake of condoms than other approaches, such as those that focus on messages about negative health outcomes.

This study makes an important contribution to existing evidence that risk-focused approaches to sexual health education, or health promotion, are less effective than comprehensive approaches, which encourage open communication about multiple aspects of sex and relationships, including sexual pleasure.

Pleasure is part of life

Sexual health interventions – which may include school-based education or broader health promotion campaigns targeting people of all ages – are usually designed to achieve particular health goals. These might be increasing STI screening, promoting human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination, or reducing incidence of STIs.

Concern for sexual pleasure is often not considered relevant and messages about health risk dominate.

However, sexual relationships and pleasure are important aspects of human life and sexual health promotion is more effective if it accounts for this.

Read more:
‘I always get horny … am I not normal?’: teenage girls often feel shame about pleasure. Sex education needs to address this

Compelling examples of this come from the HIV prevention campaigns created by activists and community organisations in the 1980s and 90s. Many of these campaigns were controversial due to their use of highly sexualised imagery and celebration of gay and bisexual men’s sexuality, which had been criticised as hedonistic and irresponsible in the face of the HIV/AIDS crisis.

However, sex-positive messages were key to the success of these campaigns, which worked to normalise safe-sex through presenting it as fun and erotic.

Pleasure and consent

Affirmation of sexual pleasure is an important part of sexual consent education.

More than 30 years ago, in an important early paper, American scholar Michelle Fine famously articulated how a “missing discourse of desire” in school-based sexuality education undermines young women’s sexual health and safety.

Writing about the US education system, Fine argued school-based sexuality education invalidates female sexual desire. This leaves young women more vulnerable to sexual violence or unwanted pregnancy.

The capacity to assert what one does not want in their sexual relationships, requires awareness of what one does want. It also requires the confidence to voice these desires without fear of being shamed.

Read more:
How to get consent for sex (and no, it doesn’t have to spoil the mood)

Sexuality education should therefore be about building people’s sexual agency and confidence to talk openly about the pleasures and risks of sex. Achieving this requires recognition of, and respect for, young people’s sexuality and relationships.

Does sexual pleasure belong in classrooms?

The idea that school-based sexuality education should focus on pleasure can be controversial. How do we teach sexual pleasure in a classroom?

However, pleasure-based sexuality education is not about the mechanics of sex. Rather it’s an approach to sexuality education that affirms people’s right to sexual pleasure and fulfilment.

This may include emphasising fun and enjoyment in condom use, rather than focusing on cautionary tales.

Or it may be about giving people permission to talk openly about sexual identity or the complexities of relationships.

Educators caution this approach should not impose particular definitions of pleasure – pleasure can be many different things to different people.

Rather, pleasure-based sex education is about opening educational space for young people to safely explore, and developing critical thinking around, sex and relationships.

Sexual pleasure supports sexual rights and health

The basis of sexual rights is the opportunity for all people to pursue satisfying sexual relationships, free from harm or discrimination.

Respect for sexual rights underpins inclusive sexuality education, universal access to sexual and reproductive health care, and protection from sexual violence and discrimination.

Intrinsic to sexual rights is the acknowledgement that sexual pleasure is a valued part of human relationships that supports health and well-being.

Read more:
Good sex ed doesn’t lead to teen pregnancy, it prevents it

Jennifer Power receives funding from the Australian Research Council, the Australian Department of Health and Fairer Victoria. She has previously received funding from ViiV Healthcare.

– ref. Sex ed needs to talk about pleasure and fun. Safe sex depends on it and condom use rises – https://theconversation.com/sex-ed-needs-to-talk-about-pleasure-and-fun-safe-sex-depends-on-it-and-condom-use-rises-176572

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

It’s a bad sign when a government starts eating its own.

The backbench Liberal revolt that pushed a protection for transgender kids through the House of Representatives, and thereby inadvertently doomed Scott Morrison’s religious discrimination legislation, has bitten deeply with the PM and senior ministers.

It showed they’d lost control of their troops. Humiliatingly, it revealed they hadn’t known what was coming.

Figuratively speaking, they’d had been caught undressed, on the floor of the parliament in the middle of the night.

During the debate on the religious discrimination package, Trent Zimmerman, Bridget Archer, Katie Allen, Dave Sharma and Fiona Martin crossed the floor on an amendment to the sex discrimination act that would protect all children at religious schools.

This was in contrast to the government’s much narrower proposal to protect gay students from expulsion from these schools, but not cover transgender students.

Normally, senior ministers would just apply a big dollop of spin to the situation in explaining away the government’s loss. They’d say it was unfortunate but just stay with the line that Liberal MPs can exercise their consciences and cross the floor when they feel strongly about something.

But publicly and privately, ministers are in high dudgeon with the now-famous (or infamous, in their eyes) five, claiming treachery and betrayal. They allege people went back on their word, deals were broken, the PM was ambushed.

Defence Minister Peter Dutton holds the position of “leader of the house.” He has a lot of skin in the game when it comes to ensuring the government doesn’t lose votes.

Dutton told the ABC on Friday Morrison had been “misled”.

“There were undertakings that were given. The undertaking wasn’t honoured,” he said.

Dutton didn’t provide details or specify individuals. “But the government doesn’t go into a vote like that unless there’s been assurances given.”

“We had very clear statements from a number of people, including beyond the five. … The Prime Minister based his judgement, his actions, his decisions on a perfectly reasonable basis following discussion, and it’s difficult when you get to the floor of parliament and those undertakings aren’t honoured.”

Dutton added the obvious – in a parliament where the government only had a majority of one, individuals are empowered on issues they believe important to them. (He did not reference periodic threats – which admittedly often haven’t come to much – by Nationals MP George Christensen.)

To the five, the issue of transgender children was important, for reasons of principle, politics and in a couple of cases professional background (Allen is a former paediatrician, Martin a psychologist).

À lire aussi :
Grattan on Friday: Morrison’s religious discrimination package couldn’t fly on a wing and a prayer

Ministers argue that undertakings were broken. But if that was the case – and we can’t know without more information – it was a two-way street.

Morrison had undertaken that trans kids would be offered protection. This was documented in a letter to Anthony Albanese which the opposition leader tabled in the debate.

In his letter dated December 1, Morrison wrote: “in keeping with my Second Reading Speech, where I stated there is no place in our education system for any form of discrimination against a student on the basis of their sexuality or gender identity, the Government will move an amendment to remove the provision of the Sex Discrimination Act which was included in 2013 which limited the protections provided under this act.”

The same day, Allen posted on Facebook: “Proud that the Sex Discrimination Act will be modified to protect LGBTIQA+ kids in schools. This will help the lives of so many children- it’s a real win for tolerance and diversity. Thank you Angie Bell MP, Dave Sharma MP and Fiona Martin MP for your strength in advocacy.”

It was clear a comprehensive amendment was then expected by those Liberals involved with the issue. But by this week, the PM had narrowed what he was willing to do.

Whatever the ins and outs of the haggling, we do know that some of the five had given notice they would or could break ranks.

Archer went public opposing the religious discrimination package. Zimmerman told the Coalition party room he reserved his position (that is the formal way MPs declare to colleagues they may vote against something). Sharma had expressed concerns in media interviews.

While Dutton has been out with the stock whip publicly, it’s understood the Prime Minister’s office has been expressing its displeasure behind the scenes. Its approach is said to be heavy handed.

As he put his religious discrimination legislation in the freezer, Morrison was hit by yet another leak.

A story in The Australian claimed he had been overridden in cabinet when he proposed, as a way of trying to secure votes for the religious discrimination legislation, that the government “put a national integrity commission bill on the notice paper for debate”.

Ministers dispute the story, insisting the matter was canvassed in a much more low key manner as part of a general strategy discussion. But from Morrison’s point of view, most disturbing would be the fact of the leak and the way it had been cast to discredit him.

At what is both the fag end and the business end of the term, Morrison is living in an unnerving world where he doesn’t know what might turn up next.

Michelle Grattan ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.

– ref. View from The Hill: Peter Dutton accuses Liberal rebels of breaking undertakings – https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-peter-dutton-accuses-liberal-rebels-of-breaking-undertakings-176989

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jaya A R Dantas, Deputy Chair, Academic Board; Dean International, Faculty of Health Sciences and Professor of International Health, Curtin University

While Omicron continues to infect people across Australia and the world, many people who’ve already had COVID will likely be re-exposed to the virus.

Depending on your local rules, if you’re exposed again within 30 days of your last infection, you’re unlikely to need to isolate or get another COVID test.

In some countries, you may not need to re-test for 90 days, unless you develop new symptoms.

So why is this the case?

What’s the incubation period for Omicron?

The time between exposure to the virus and symptoms for COVID is between one and 14 days. This lag time is known as the “incubation period”.

However, most people display symptoms by day five or six after exposure.

Emerging evidence suggests the median incubation period for Omicron is even shorter. In US and European studies, the median incubation time for Omicron was three days.

More reinfections with Omicron

Research suggests Omicron is more capable than past variants of reinfecting people who have already had COVID.

A study from the Imperial College London’s COVID-19 response team estimated the risk of reinfection with Omicron to be 5.4 times higher than with Delta. So people who’ve had a prior COVID infection, from any variant before Omicron, were five times more likely to be re-infected during the Omicron wave than the Delta wave.

Omicron appears significantly more likely to evade the natural immunity people build up from past infections.

How long should I wait before re-testing?

Global studies indicate you don’t need to re-test for 30-90 days after a COVID positive test if you’re re-exposed, depending on the jurisdiction.

This is because most people develop some immunity after recovering from the virus, so have a low risk of becoming re-infected in the short term.

A large study undertaken in one of Italy’s former COVID hotspots reveals people who’ve had COVID should be tested again, if re-exposed, only after at least four weeks.

This study found the virus takes an average 30 days to clear from the body after the first positive test result and an average 36 days after symptoms first appear.

Read more:
If my child or I have COVID, when can we get our vaccine or booster shot?

In Queensland, you don’t need to be re-tested or isolate if you’re exposed again within 28 days after ending isolating, regardless of symptoms. In New South Wales it’s also 28 days and in Victoria it’s 30 days, but you’ll need to get another test if you develop fresh symptoms.

If you come into contact with someone with COVID after this time frame, you’ll need to self-isolate, test and follow local advice.

This time frame is different in the United Kingdom. Following a substantial clinical review of evidence and testing data in the UK, the government now advises waiting at least 90 days after a positive test before retesting – unless you develop new symptoms.

Part of the rationale is you have a low chance of becoming reinfected within 90 days after testing positive. So it’s highly likely a positive test in this window would be a false result due to viral shedding, meaning you’d have to unnecessarily isolate.

The UK Health Security Agency defines COVID reinfection as having a positive test more than 90 days after your last positive test.

Read more:
What’s the difference in protection against Omicron between 2 doses and 3 doses of vaccine?

You should still get a booster dose

The evidence for the immunity we get from COVID infection is more limited than that for the immunity we get from vaccines.

Growing evidence also suggests getting vaccinated after having COVID significantly improves protection and further lowers the risk of reinfection.

So the need for boosters remains strong.

However, we should keep in mind the huge issue of vaccine equity, as many people including some health workers, the elderly and those immuno-compromised in low and middle income countries haven’t even received their first two doses yet.

As a Global Public Health researcher, Jaya Dantas has been mapping the Global COVID-19 pandemic especially as it impacts developing countries, social determinants and vaccine equity. She is currently involved with two projects in Western Australia focussing on COVID-19. She is part of a team funded by WA Future Health Research and Innovation Fund – ‘Quantifying contact networks for COVID-19 outbreak and leading a second project funded by Healthway that will examine the impact of COVID-19 and domestic violence on CALD communities. Jaya is the International SIG Convenor of the Public Health Association of Australia and is on the Global Gender Equality in Health Leadership Committee for Women in Global Health, Australia.

– ref. Why don’t most people with COVID need to test for another 30 days, even if they’re re-exposed? – https://theconversation.com/why-dont-most-people-with-covid-need-to-test-for-another-30-days-even-if-theyre-re-exposed-176515